Like many family lawyers, I was outraged by the Public Accounts Committee's comments about 'avaricious lawyers' not telling people about mediation, to profit from courtroom battles (see [2007] Gazette, 18 October, 5). However, in truth, this is nothing new.


For some years, the Legal Services Commission has seen mediation as a panacea for family problems and grown increasingly frustrated when solicitors avoid the mediation requirement for having a legal aid certificate by ticking the 'domestic violence' box on the relevant forms. The commission has just reversed that, which will force terrified victims of domestic violence to go and see a mediator, even when it is obvious that mediation is not appropriate. Ironically, this is going to waste a lot of money, because mediators will charge for useless 'intake' meetings, after which they will (hopefully) agree with us that a domestic abuse case is not suitable for mediation.



We have to recognise that there are those who do not take seriously their duties to push alternative dispute resolution (ADR) where appropriate, but this hysterical conviction that all family lawyers conspire to keep things away from mediation is misguided. A much better plan would be to lean on the judges to push ADR when cases that are clearly suitable for it, end up in front of them.



Tim Melville-Walker, MacDonald Oates, Petersfield, Hants