If you can't agree on finances

Before going to court

Court should be a last resort. Before applying, you should have genuinely tried to reach agreement through:

Direct negotiation – talking between yourselves or through solicitors.

Mediation – working with a neutral mediator who helps you find common ground. You must usually attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) before applying to court, unless an exemption applies.

Other dispute resolution – such as arbitration or collaborative law.

Courts expect you to have made reasonable efforts to settle. If you rush to court without trying to negotiate, the judge may criticise your approach and potentially penalise you on costs.

Applying for financial remedies

If agreement isn’t possible, you apply for a “financial remedy order.” This asks the court to decide how your finances should be divided.

Form A

The application is made using Form A (Notice of Application for a Financial Order). You can apply at any time after starting divorce proceedings.

The court fee is £303.

What you’re asking for

On Form A, you tick which orders you might want:

• Lump sum order – one-off payment
• Property adjustment order – transfer or sale of property
• Periodical payments order – ongoing maintenance
• Pension sharing order – division of pensions
• Pension compensation sharing order – for pension compensation schemes

You’re not committing to these specific orders – you’re opening the door for the court to make whatever orders are fair.

The financial remedy process

After you apply, the case follows a structured process:

Stage 1: Financial disclosure (Form E)

Both parties must complete Form E – a detailed 29-page financial statement covering income, assets, debts, expenses, and needs. This must be exchanged 35 days before the First Directions Appointment.

Form E requires supporting documents:

• Bank statements for all accounts (usually 12 months)
• Mortgage statements
• Pension valuations (CETVs)
• Business accounts if self-employed
• Payslips or tax returns
• Property valuations

Full and frank disclosure is mandatory. Hiding assets can result in serious consequences including costs orders, adverse inferences, or the settlement being overturned years later.

Stage 2: First Directions Appointment (FDA)

This initial court hearing sets the timetable. The judge reviews:

• Whether disclosure is complete
• What valuations or expert evidence are needed
• Whether there are any preliminary issues to resolve
• When the next hearing should be

The FDA is procedural – the judge doesn’t decide your case yet. It typically lasts 15-30 minutes.

Stage 3: Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR)

The FDR is a settlement hearing. A judge reads the papers, indicates what order they think the court would make, and encourages both parties to negotiate.

The FDR is a unique opportunity:

• You hear a judicial view of your case
• You can negotiate with informed expectations
• The judge facilitating the FDR cannot hear the final trial

Most cases settle at or shortly after the FDR. Many people find that hearing a judge’s view helps them compromise.

Stage 4: Final hearing

If you can’t settle at FDR, the case proceeds to a final hearing. A different judge (not the one from FDR) hears evidence, considers submissions, and makes a binding decision.

Final hearings typically last 1-2 days for straightforward cases, longer for complex ones.

Timeline

Typical timescales:

Total time from application to final hearing: approximately 9-12 months, though delays are common.

Costs

Financial remedy proceedings can be expensive:

Court fees

• £303 to apply
• No fee for the hearings themselves

Legal costs

Solicitor costs vary widely based on complexity and how contested the case becomes:

These are rough estimates – complex cases with barristers, experts, and multiple days of hearing cost significantly more.

Who pays?

Each party normally pays their own legal costs. However, the court can order one party to contribute to the other’s costs if:

• They’ve behaved unreasonably in litigation
• They’ve failed to disclose properly
• They’ve refused reasonable offers to settle
• One party has no resources and the other has means

Costs orders are less common in family cases than in other litigation, but unreasonable conduct can be penalised.

What the judge considers

At a final hearing, the judge applies Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973:

• Welfare of children (first consideration)
• Income and earning capacity
• Financial needs and obligations
• Standard of living during the marriage
• Age and duration of marriage
• Physical or mental disability
• Contributions (financial and non-financial)
• Conduct (only if inequitable to disregard)
• Loss of benefits (like pensions)

The judge has wide discretion to achieve fairness. Outcomes are not easily predictable, which is why most people prefer to settle rather than let a stranger decide their future.

Making offers

Throughout proceedings, you can make offers to settle. These should be made in writing, typically through solicitors.

Calderbank offers

A formal settlement offer made “without prejudice save as to costs.” If the recipient refuses and does no better at trial, the court may order them to pay costs from the date of the offer.

Open offers

Made openly, so the judge knows about them. Can demonstrate reasonableness if the other party is being unrealistic.

Making reasonable offers protects your position on costs and shows willingness to settle.

Representing yourself

You can represent yourself in financial remedy proceedings (as a “litigant in person”), but it’s challenging:

Difficulties:

• Complex procedural rules
• Form E is demanding to complete
• Negotiations require legal knowledge
• Hearings require advocacy skills
• Risk of poor outcome through inexperience

Possible for:

• Simple cases with limited assets
• People with good organisational skills
• Where the main issues are clear

Professional help recommended for:

• Complex assets (businesses, pensions, multiple properties)
• High conflict situations
• Where domestic abuse is involved
• Significant financial disparity

Even if you can’t afford full representation, consider:

• Initial advice on your position
• Help with Form E
• Representation at hearings only
• Solicitors for specific tasks (unbundled services)

Alternative: arbitration

If court feels too slow, expensive, or public, you can agree to use arbitration instead. A trained arbitrator (usually a barrister or retired judge) decides your case privately.

Advantages:

• Faster than court
• Private (not public hearings)
• You choose the arbitrator
• More flexible scheduling

Disadvantages:

• Both parties must agree to it
• You pay the arbitrator’s fees
• Still need legal representation usually

Arbitration awards can be converted into court orders for enforcement.

After the court decides

The judge’s order is binding on both parties. It can include:

• Property transfers or sales
• Lump sum payments
• Pension sharing
• Maintenance orders
• Clean break provisions

Appeals are possible but difficult – you need to show the judge made a legal error or the decision was plainly wrong, not just that you disagree with it.