Latest / #Divorce: Support before, during and after with Sarah-Jane / Season 4 Episode 14 #From Adversarial to Aligned: The One Couple, One Lawyer Approach

Transcript

Season 4 Episode 14 #From Adversarial to Aligned: The One Couple, One Lawyer Approach · #Divorce: Support before, during and after with Sarah-Jane

• 0:00
  Welcome to Hashtag Divorce Support before, during and
• 0:03
  after. I'm Sarah Jane Tester, a French
• 0:07
  family mediator, French family lawyer and lawyer supervisor.
• 0:12
  This podcast is here to support you through separation or
• 0:17
  divorce. We talk about much more than the
• 0:20
  law. We explore well-being,
• 0:22
  relationships, parenting, finances, and the often
• 0:27
  invisible emotional realities of language.
• 0:31
  Each episode is designed as a space of support to help you
• 0:36
  understand your options, protect yourself, and get through this
• 0:40
  chapter without feeling alone. Divorce isn't just an ending,
• 0:46
  it's a new beginning, and you don't have to go to it alone.
• 0:52
  Most people assume that if you're separating, you must have
• 0:56
  your own lawyer. Today we're exploring A
• 0:59
  radically different idea, one couple, one lawyer, and what
• 1:04
  that means for conflict, fairness and outcome.
• 1:09
  My guest today is Anthony Ball, a collaborative family solicitor
• 1:13
  and accredited family mediator at Rockledge Law.
• 1:17
  With over 25 years experience working in divorce, separation
• 1:21
  and cohabitation disputes. Anthony is particularly known
• 1:26
  for his work on complex financial and children matters,
• 1:29
  often involving entrepreneurs, senior executives and families
• 1:34
  with intricate business or property arrangements.
• 1:38
  Anthony is also trained in the Resolution Together process,
• 1:41
  which allows him to work with couples jointly, offering
• 1:46
  tailored, cost effective solutions while avoiding the
• 1:50
  adversarial dynamic that often makes separation more painful
• 1:55
  than it needs to be. So today with Anthony, we'll be
• 2:00
  talking about what the One Couple, One Lawyer model looks
• 2:04
  like in practice, when it can work well, where its limits are,
• 2:09
  and how it challenges some of the assumptions we make about
• 2:13
  legal representation when relationships end.
• 2:17
  Anthony, welcome to the podcast. Can you start by telling us a
• 2:22
  bit more about yourself and also what attracted you to the one
• 2:27
  couple, one lawyer approach? Hi, Sarah Jane.
• 2:30
  Well, thank you for inviting me on to this podcast.
• 2:33
  So yeah, I've got a quite a mixed practice really over the
• 2:36
  years I've sort of deal with litigation, but also probably in
• 2:40
  the last 10 years really explored now non court dispute
• 2:44
  resolution options for helping separating couples resolve
• 2:48
  finances arrangements for children or, you know, commonly
• 2:51
  both. Over the last few years,
• 2:53
  something that's really been getting in popularity is the one
• 2:56
  couple 1 Boyer model. There are many benefits to it,
• 3:01
  not only for myself, I find it a much pleasure as a way to work,
• 3:05
  but I think couples really find affinity with the principles
• 3:08
  behind it because really it's designed to provide simpler,
• 3:13
  faster, less adversarial means of resolving what couples need
• 3:18
  to get sorted out. So what does it actually mean?
• 3:21
  One couple, one lawyer. So essentially it's kind of what
• 3:26
  it says on the tin. One solicitor, one lawyer,
• 3:29
  providing neutral legal advice for the couple to explain their
• 3:33
  situation, the law as it applies so that they can work out for
• 3:38
  themselves and hopefully arrive at a fair solution.
• 3:43
  Do people understand straight away what it means?
• 3:46
  Yeah, I think so. The clients that I speak to,
• 3:50
  they're generally sort of like ahead of the law on this issue.
• 3:53
  They don't necessarily know about the option that they want
• 3:57
  to to find a particular way of working that suits them, less
• 4:01
  adversarial, simpler, all based around fairness.
• 4:05
  And so you can then sort of match the service to them.
• 4:10
  Importantly to distinguish, it's not as a Swiss, you're not
• 4:13
  stepping into the litigation arena for them.
• 4:17
  It's designed to keep couples away from that, keep the
• 4:19
  temperature down on dispute, look at solutions rather than
• 4:23
  focus on legal positions. Clients may not be seeking this
• 4:28
  option by name, they are seeking what it provides in terms of
• 4:34
  swift solution that is not adversarial.
• 4:38
  It's based on getting them working together, building
• 4:41
  communications so they can find for themselves in solutions that
• 4:45
  both content. With you were saying when we
• 4:47
  were talking about this episode that people don't actually know
• 4:52
  maybe that it exists, but that's what they want.
• 4:55
  Yeah, absolutely. And increasingly so.
• 4:57
  You know, it's going through the process of litigation is
• 5:01
  traumatic, it's expensive, it's time consuming, and I think
• 5:05
  people do understand that and are searching for better ways.
• 5:09
  This is certainly one of them. I know you're a collaborative
• 5:15
  lawyer and you're also a mediator, so can you tell us
• 5:20
  what's the difference between one couple, one lawyer and the
• 5:25
  collaborative process or the mediation?
• 5:28
  Yeah, I mean, there are a lot of similarities with both models.
• 5:30
  So starting with mediation, again, the principles are
• 5:34
  exactly the same. It's trying to help couples find
• 5:37
  their own solution. But when mediation stops, is
• 5:40
  that as the mediator? And I deal with a lot of family
• 5:42
  disputes as a mediator, I can't offer them advice.
• 5:47
  I can maybe explain some legal principles, but I have to stop
• 5:51
  short and be able to advise them what would be or what a fair
• 5:54
  outcome might look like. With the one couple, one way
• 5:57
  process, you can, you can go, you can go that store a step
• 6:01
  further. You can explain the law, but
• 6:03
  also you can give them that advice and explain what the
• 6:05
  parameters of a fair settlement would look like.
• 6:08
  And then it's over to them to negotiate within those
• 6:12
  parameters. In the same way there's some
• 6:14
  similarities with the collaborative law model process.
• 6:16
  You are providing the legal advice to the clients, but
• 6:20
  you're doing it for both couples.
• 6:21
  So in a very neutral way. But unlike the collaborative law
• 6:25
  process, you are not in the negotiation.
• 6:27
  You step out at that stage, you provide the advice, you explain
• 6:32
  what's the promises of the fair settlement may look like, but
• 6:35
  then you hand it over to the couple for them to discuss and
• 6:38
  agree where they would want to resolve the dispute.
• 6:42
  So. What happens if they come back
• 6:45
  to you with something that doesn't seem fair for one or the
• 6:49
  other? Yeah, and it does happen.
• 6:52
  You can explain that and you can flag that there may be issues.
• 6:55
  For example, if they're talking about a financial settlement
• 6:58
  that they're wanting the court to adopt in the form of a
• 7:01
  consent order, you would make sure that they understand, you
• 7:04
  know where the issues might be with what they've agreed.
• 7:08
  It's not a rubber stamping exercise.
• 7:10
  When consent or this financial settlements are presented to the
• 7:13
  court, the judge has to assess that what they've reached is
• 7:16
  fair and reasonable and maybe knocked back.
• 7:20
  Ultimately though, the decision is with the couple, but as long
• 7:23
  as they understand and they are aware of the legal parameters
• 7:27
  and the factors around the settlement, then it is very much
• 7:31
  a matter for them. My role is simplifying the law
• 7:35
  for them, breaking it down in the way that they can
• 7:37
  understand, and then using their discussions and their agreement.
• 7:43
  What kind of couples would this model work best for?
• 7:49
  It's not for everybody. Perhaps it's an easy question to
• 7:52
  answer by explaining where it may not be suitable.
• 7:55
  Certainly in cases where there has been or there is ongoing
• 7:59
  domestic abuse, then it really is not for them because
• 8:02
  importantly, having given the advice that they need, I can't
• 8:07
  then help with the negotiation. So they've got to feel
• 8:09
  comfortable being able to talk to one another and negotiate on
• 8:13
  a level playing field. And if they feel disadvantaged
• 8:17
  or if they feel inhibited in doing that, then it starts to
• 8:21
  rule out this option as a viable process for them.
• 8:24
  It may be that we would look at something more suitable.
• 8:28
  We do at the very start have an assessment meeting with each
• 8:32
  individually just to get a sense of the backgrounds to the
• 8:35
  relationship and the breakdown and their aims and objectives.
• 8:39
  And during that assessment we will screen very carefully for
• 8:42
  this use of domestic abuse and things that may preclude them
• 8:46
  from being able to use this process successfully, and that
• 8:50
  continues throughout as well. The assessment meeting is very
• 8:53
  much the start of that, but throughout the warm couple and
• 8:57
  lawyer option, if the the client elects that, we will continually
• 9:01
  be making sure that it's still suitable for them.
• 9:03
  And if it becomes unsuitable at any point, then we can pause the
• 9:07
  process and discuss perhaps other alternate options that may
• 9:11
  be better for them at that stage.
• 9:14
  It's very similar to mediation in that sense.
• 9:17
  Yeah, absolutely. If you start with that model,
• 9:22
  but then one of the parties feel that it's not quite for them,
• 9:29
  what happens? We would discuss that with each
• 9:32
  of them and it may be that we look at alternate options for
• 9:36
  carrying the discussion of the negotiation forward.
• 9:40
  It could be something simple like they've got a bit of a
• 9:42
  blockage in the negotiation and it could be resolved by bringing
• 9:45
  a mediator to help them. It could be more than that
• 9:48
  though. It could be where they do
• 9:50
  actually need help in the negotiation and so you could
• 9:53
  then signpost into the collaborative law process so
• 9:56
  they would each go off and obtain independent legal advice
• 10:00
  and maybe look at using the collaborative model to continue
• 10:04
  the journey. Alternatively, it might be
• 10:07
  simply they just need independent legal advice and to
• 10:10
  instruct a solution in a traditional way with the
• 10:12
  negotiation. Or ultimately there is the
• 10:15
  option of either the cause or the the arbitration process too,
• 10:20
  but we'll discuss the full range with them and then they can
• 10:23
  decide and work out which is going to be best for them to
• 10:25
  take. And is it like similarly to the
• 10:29
  collaborative process where you can no longer act for either one
• 10:35
  of the parties? Do you have to stop?
• 10:37
  Yeah. That's right.
• 10:38
  So we would step out at that point completely and they would
• 10:42
  instruct alternate lawyers to help them get to where they need
• 10:46
  to be so. When at the moment, like we were
• 10:49
  saying, very few people know about this model, what do you
• 10:53
  think would need to change for it to be more widely adopted?
• 11:00
  Yeah, I mean resolution are doing a lot to promote it and
• 11:04
  it's known by different names as well, which is a little bit
• 11:07
  unhelpful. Resolution, call it resolution
• 11:10
  together, but it's the same thing.
• 11:12
  It's one lawyer, one solicitor stepping in to advise and help
• 11:16
  the couple resolve the financial children, this result or both.
• 11:20
  I think clients don't necessarily know that this is
• 11:24
  out there, but they know how they want to deal with their
• 11:27
  separation, how they want to deal with their divorce.
• 11:30
  And they will often talk to me about wanting to find amicable
• 11:33
  solutions, not wanting to escalate costs, not wanting to
• 11:37
  really drag on through what can be quite a bitter court process.
• 11:42
  Crucial whether children involved because the litigation
• 11:46
  can be really corrosive towards the parental relationship that
• 11:50
  needs to continue way beyond after the lawyers that have been
• 11:53
  involved in the case. They will talk to me about how
• 11:57
  can they navigate through what is quite a complex legal
• 12:00
  process, but in a way that is very civil and respectful
• 12:04
  towards each other and we can match that service.
• 12:07
  I think the more people that start using it, you build up the
• 12:11
  word of mouth and that critical mass so that hopefully it will
• 12:14
  become part of the norm. I think we've got a way to go.
• 12:19
  We're just starting to use this process now, and I think the
• 12:22
  more people that can experience the benefits of it and spread
• 12:26
  the word, the more it becomes routine in helping couples out
• 12:30
  the issues from their separation.
• 12:33
  So is it correct to say that it's for people who get along?
• 12:39
  You often hear I don't want to pay too much for my divorce.
• 12:45
  We get along well instead of doing their divorce alone like a
• 12:50
  lot of people do. In that situation, it's more
• 12:53
  reassuring to go through that process because at least you get
• 12:57
  the right legal advice and not the ChatGPT advice.
• 13:01
  Yes, yeah, I think certainly it's cost effective.
• 13:03
  Obviously, you know, the couple are not spending money on on
• 13:07
  separate lawyers and that money obviously is coming from one
• 13:11
  pot, it's a matrimonial pot. And the more is spent on legal
• 13:14
  advice, the less there is to share out at the end of the day.
• 13:18
  So certainly there is a saving where couples are able to use
• 13:22
  this process because they're sharing their fees, they're
• 13:24
  pointing one lawyer, that lawyer is providing neutral advice to
• 13:28
  both of them, which they can then use, but specifically is
• 13:31
  tailored to their situation. It saves time and you're not
• 13:35
  waiting for correspondence to go backwards and forwards between
• 13:37
  lawyers and for instructions to be taken and things to be
• 13:40
  misinterpreted again, which escalates things that it can be
• 13:44
  refined in that that way. But as long as clients are
• 13:48
  willing to and are able to communicate with one another, it
• 13:52
  should be an option that's available to most.
• 13:54
  Because I don't think many couples, having gone through the
• 13:58
  trauma and the emotional pain of a separation of divorce,
• 14:00
  necessarily want to hide, to enter into litigation
• 14:03
  unnecessarily. I think there are other and
• 14:05
  better ways. I think most people will want to
• 14:07
  look for that, and speaking to a lawyer that's able to offer a
• 14:11
  range of services and to match what is the best option for that
• 14:15
  couple I think is invaluable. Yeah, well, we see it more and
• 14:20
  more people who just don't want to lawyers, they just want to do
• 14:25
  it quickly, but make sure that they're doing things correctly.
• 14:30
  That's important for them too. So that seems the best option.
• 14:34
  Yeah, I think it will take time because people have in their
• 14:37
  minds, traditionally a divorce should be all about litigation
• 14:41
  and it's quite brutal. It involves having to go to
• 14:45
  court, very upsetting and painful.
• 14:47
  Traditionally, perhaps that's what it had to be 1520 years ago
• 14:52
  when I started. In practice, there wasn't many
• 14:55
  alternatives around at that point, but now there are, and
• 14:58
  it's a matter of educating people that there are better,
• 15:01
  more dignified ways of dealing with the separation.
• 15:04
  And really, that court should be the last, last resource.
• 15:08
  But we've seen how things have evolved slowly with mediation,
• 15:13
  with the collaborative process. But surely the one couple, one
• 15:18
  lawyer is going to follow the same route and as you say, it
• 15:22
  takes time. The more people realise they are
• 15:25
  the waste of doing things and that the better it will be for
• 15:28
  that model. If separating couples could hear
• 15:32
  one thing before choosing their legal route, what would it be?
• 15:38
  Court really should be the last resort.
• 15:40
  It's expensive, it's a slow and it's an incredibly corrosive
• 15:45
  tool sometimes. Absolutely, it is necessary, but
• 15:48
  it shouldn't be the first thing that people are thinking of when
• 15:52
  they're going through a divorce separation.
• 15:55
  There are far better options out there for most and to speak to a
• 16:00
  family lawyer that is able to offer the full range and discuss
• 16:04
  each with the client and work out what's going to be best for
• 16:07
  them and their family is really invaluable.
• 16:11
  And spending and investing that time at the beginning, you
• 16:14
  really just can't beat that. Just making sure you're starting
• 16:17
  off on the right foot to begin with.
• 16:19
  It will pay dividends down the line.
• 16:24
  And would you recommend this model for just any?
• 16:30
  Well, if people agree, is it OK for to deal with children, for
• 16:33
  finances, for everything? Yeah, absolutely.
• 16:37
  Because I mean to start with you've got one lawyer that's
• 16:40
  engaged in looking at finances and potentially children
• 16:43
  matters. So can make sure that the advice
• 16:46
  that is given is holistic. You're not having to deal with
• 16:49
  separate lawyers doing with separate things in silos, and
• 16:51
  they may not be that joined up. So instructing one lawyer that
• 16:55
  can do both is incredibly valuable.
• 16:59
  It's a saving of money and of time as well.
• 17:02
  The couple can be very direct with the lawyer and say, well,
• 17:06
  this is what we've agreed so far.
• 17:07
  This is what we're having trouble with.
• 17:09
  Can you explain how the law would deal with this sort of
• 17:12
  situation and what fair outcomes might look like taking accounts
• 17:16
  of all these different moving parts?
• 17:18
  And of course they can. And they can provide that advice
• 17:22
  for the couple's take away, think about and work out what it
• 17:24
  is want to to do and. So you in that model you do the
• 17:30
  financial disclosure. Would help the couple with the
• 17:33
  financial disclosure and the level of information that is to
• 17:36
  be provided. And yeah, there's got to be, I
• 17:40
  mean, in any matter involving a resolution of finances, there
• 17:44
  has to be that transparency to start with.
• 17:46
  And of course, the clients have to commit to providing financial
• 17:50
  transparency so that everybody understands what there is, what
• 17:54
  everything is worth. And we will help the couple in
• 17:56
  that journey too. In other process you would work
• 18:01
  with financial advisors if needed.
• 18:04
  It's similar, but you're just alone dealing with all that.
• 18:08
  So if it helps the couple then we can bring in independent
• 18:11
  financial advisors. Quite often there are pensions
• 18:13
  involved and pensions are a significant part of any divorce
• 18:17
  and so a crucial part of of divorce settlements.
• 18:20
  So we will help with all of that to make sure that the actual
• 18:23
  reports are available for the clients to look at and also
• 18:27
  interpreting those reports as well because they can be
• 18:30
  enormously complex. So having that explained and
• 18:33
  what it means there, particularly for the situation,
• 18:36
  can be crucial. We can work with divorce coaches
• 18:39
  again, in the same way that you might if you're dealing with a
• 18:42
  couple in a mediation or collaborative law setting.
• 18:45
  You can build a team around the process, which can be enormously
• 18:49
  helpful, but ultimately it's tailored to what the couple
• 18:52
  need. It's good for you because you've
• 18:55
  got this experience working as a mediator, as a collaborative
• 19:00
  lawyer, so you know how to work with other professionals in that
• 19:04
  setting. It really does blend well to
• 19:06
  those skills and I think that's why perhaps I've enjoyed it so
• 19:09
  much. And it is just, as I say,
• 19:11
  another option which we can we can offer clients and make sure
• 19:15
  that they're starting off in the right way to begin with.
• 19:19
  I've enjoyed it tremendously. Clients may not they come to us
• 19:22
  knowing this is the option they want to take, but they will
• 19:25
  describe how they want to deal with that divorce or separation
• 19:29
  can say, Oh well, yeah, I know how I can help with that.
• 19:33
  And one couple, one boy is really a useful.
• 19:37
  Tool. So if somebody listening to this
• 19:39
  podcast thinks, Oh yes, I would like to work with Anthony, what
• 19:44
  do they have to do? Yeah, just simply give me a
• 19:48
  call, drop me an e-mail and we'll take it from there.
• 19:50
  So as I say, we always start with initial assessment meeting
• 19:54
  and that's done with them individually and we'll work
• 19:58
  through, find out the background, the history, what
• 19:59
  they're hoping to achieve, any concerns with screen for
• 20:03
  suitability. I have had couples that have
• 20:06
  come to me wanting to go down this route, but it's not
• 20:09
  necessarily been appropriate for them.
• 20:11
  So we have been able to signpost them in a different way.
• 20:14
  It's still working leave off to resolve problems without having
• 20:17
  to go down the expensive route of litigation, but they don't
• 20:21
  need to worry too much. We can discuss the full range of
• 20:24
  options with them and if there is a better way of dealing with
• 20:27
  their situation, we can work that out and help them.
• 20:32
  Thank you, Anthony for telling us about this new model.
• 20:36
  Hopefully it will gain some traction. 1 take away from
• 20:41
  today, from what you've just told us, is that separation
• 20:45
  doesn't have to be mean conflict, but it's important to
• 20:51
  know by showing examples of how you can deal with your
• 20:55
  separation. And that's one of the very good
• 20:57
  examples. So this new approach, One
• 21:01
  Couple, One lawyer, invites us to slow down and to think
• 21:05
  differently about how divorce can be dealt with, even with the
• 21:10
  help of a professional like you. And this shows that the outcome
• 21:16
  of using one lawyer is beneficial for the whole family
• 21:21
  and helps for the future relationship between the parents
• 21:25
  that remain parents. Using that model helps them
• 21:29
  continue doing their parenting the best way they can do it.
• 21:35
  So thank you so much, Anthony, and I will put all your details
• 21:38
  in the podcast notes so that people can reach out.
• 21:43
  Thanks, Adrian. Yeah, it's been great talking to
• 21:44
  you. And yeah, anybody has any
• 21:47
  questions? Happy to just have the various
• 21:49
  informal chats and answer any questions that they may have and
• 21:53
  take it from there. Great.
• 21:55
  Thank you.