Delay, Delay, Delay
In September 2025, the President of the Family Division announced reductions to the number of sitting days for the London Financial Remedies Court. With listings liable to be double-booked or pulled at late notice (and the consequent uncertainties around brief fees deeming, etc), the start of 2026 will be an uncertain landscape for practitioners. However, the real difficulties will be for those who have been awaiting a decision from the court and who have to wait even longer for a resolution. The impact of such delays is very real – not only are costs wasted and duplicated, but certain work may also need to be redone, for example, if valuations become out of date. And it will leave families in limbo for even longer.
And the solution might be…NCDR
Since April 2024, there has been an increased emphasis on Non-Court Dispute Resolution (“NCDR”). Moving into 2026, we are likely to see more and more parties seeking to resolve their differences outside of the court system. For those who can afford to, paying for resolution -whether via arbitration, mediation, early neutral evaluation or a private FDR- is looking ever more attractive for a multitude of reasons. Not only can they select their tribunal (finding an experienced financial remedies practitioner to adjudicate), they can also arrange the date, time and place to their own convenience rather than being subject to the vagaries of the court system.
Whilst those with the means to pay for such methods of NCDR have an attractive and workable solution, not so for those who cannot afford to buy private justice. This raises worrying questions about access to justice and concerns about the development of a two-tier system. There is also the real issue that if a large number of cases are resolved behind closed doors, then reported case law will not reflect the true position.
Consultations and reform…
The Government committed in their election manifesto to bring about change in relation to the law for cohabiting couples, promising to “strengthen the rights and protections available to women in cohabiting couples.” In November 2025, the Government indicated that they are considering reform on a broader basis and that there will be a consultation to bring about consistency and fairness in relation to financial remedies on divorce and cohabitation rights. The consultation is due to start in Spring 2026, but it is unlikely that any concrete changes will be seen in 2026.
The same applies in relation to nuptial agreements and the Government is actively considering the proposals made by the Law Commission in 2014 (no, that is not a typo – eleven long years ago……).
Repeal of the Presumption of parental involvement
In October 2025, the Government announced that it would be repealing the presumption that it is in a child’s best interests to have both parents involved in their lives. This change follows concerning research demonstrating that the presumption can lead to children being at risk from domestic abuse. However, no timescale has yet been given for when this change might take place.
Surrogacy
In 2023, the Law Commission called for law reform in relation to surrogacy, with intended parents being the parents of the child from birth and with clearer rules and safeguards. Whilst reform is needed in this area, I fear we are unlikely to see progress in 2026 as the Government has stated that parliamentary priorities do not include legislative reform in relation to surrogacy.
Financial constraints
Rachel Reeves’ Autumn 2025 budget will have implications that will be felt by family practitioners in 2026 and beyond. Whilst the so-called “mansion tax” is not expected to come in until April 2028, its spectre will have an impact on financial remedies cases immediately. For example, when considering whether it is appropriate for one party to stay in the family home, it will be necessary to consider whether the increased tax will be affordable or whether it is more appropriate for the parties to re-house under the threshold. Inevitably, the news will also impact the housing market overall, but it remains to be seen how that will manifest. Some predictions consider that the value of properties may be reduced by 2-5% (due to buyers factoring additional costs into their purchasing budget), which may make some financial remedy cases more difficult to resolve. For those cases already underway, caution will be needed for valuations that have already been undertaken.
Presentation
The Supreme Court’s decision in Standish will inevitably lead to more investment of time by practitioners in identifying at an early stage whether assets are matrimonial or non-matrimonial. It will be more important to provide contemporaneous evidence in support of a party’s position.
We can also expect a change to the presentation of the document by which the parties set out their financial disclosure for the court to consider. The Family Procedure Rule Committee has proposed that the Form E will be amended to include details of any time that the parties cohabited prior to their marriage. It will also include a state pension forecast and the expiry date of any mortgage redemption penalties.
For more information on the issues discussed in this article, contact Kelly Gerrard or call 020 7465 4300.
