Legal
Haley v Haley: The Future Of Arbitration In Family Law

The author of this article says it's an open question whether increased flexibility of arbitration awards will make arbitration more or less popular for handling divorce wrangles in future.
We regularly run commentaries about high-profile divorce
cases, or court wrangles between people who, while they are not
famous, experience situations that can set precedents. Given the
large financial sums at stake, divorce remains an area that
private client advisors need to track.
This article examines the future of arbitration in family law and
comes from Harriet Errington, partner at the family practice of
Boodle
Hatfield. The editors of this news service are pleased to
share these views; as usual, editorial disclaimers apply. Email
tom.burroughes@wealthbriefing.com
and jackie.bennion@clearviewpublishing.com
A recent Court of Appeal judgment (Haley v Haley [2020] EWCA Civ
1369) has radically changed the landscape in relation to
arbitration in the context of divorce proceedings. It has
highlighted, once again, the wide-ranging powers enjoyed by the
family courts in England and Wales.
In 2020, Mr and Mrs Haley’s divorce was progressing through the
court system as normal. However, just days before the two-day
final hearing in relation to their finances, they were informed
that the court could not hear their case due to “judicial
availability,” a situation in which the court cannot, for
whatever reason, provide the judge required to hear the case.
Sadly, this is becoming increasingly common as family courts have
been suffering severe delays, even before the deleterious effect
of COVID-19 on the legal infrastructure. So, Mr and Mrs Haley
found themselves, after months of legal preparation and
substantial fees incurred in the run up to the trial, delayed by
several months. They therefore decided at short notice to resolve
their dispute by other means - arbitration.
Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution more
often found in commercial courts, in which an arbitrator is
appointed jointly by the parties to act as a judge to determine
the outcome of their case. Importantly, by signing up to
arbitration, the parties agree to be bound by the arbitrator's
decision.
Arbitration has been growing in popularity in family law matters
in recent years, partly due to the log-jammed court system and
partly due to the appeal of being able to agree the choice of
judge rather than leaving it to chance. However, many people
have, often rightly, shied away from arbitration because of the
lack of recourse to an appeal, in marked contrast to the appeal
system in court proceedings.
Commercial courts famously apply strict rules to arbitration and
the family court approach has in recent years increasingly leant
towards these rigid commercial arbitration principles - at least
until the case of the Haleys.
The divorcing couple, mired in delay, quickly found themselves an
arbitrator and the arbitration commenced. When the arbitrator
handed down his final award it was not at all to the husband’s
liking, so he applied to the High Court to overturn the award on
the basis that it was wrong and unfair. The High Court, applying
strict arbitration principles, declined to overturn the
award.
Next, Mr Haley applied to the Court of Appeal. The court held
that the particular nature of the family court's supervisory duty
to achieve fairness cannot be ousted nor overridden by delegation
to an arbitrator. It was held that, in determining whether to
overturn a decision, the same test should be applied to an
arbitrator's award as that which is applied to a court's ruling.
In other words a consideration not of whether the decision had
been "obviously wrong" per the relevant arbitration rules, but
rather "not seriously or obviously wrong…just wrong."
The inevitable result of this ruling is that it will now be
considerably easier to challenge an arbitrator's award. This
ought now to allay any concerns as to the lack of recourse to an
appeal in arbitration and reassure divorcees that if an award
really is wrong, they will not be prevented from returning to the
court system
It remains to be seen as to whether the increased flexibility of
such arbitration awards, and the consequential loss of durability
in the face of challenge, will make arbitration more or less
popular going forward, though one suspects slightly more. This
judgement does, however, highlight the family court's relentless
ability to drive a coach and horses through the principles so
rigidly adhered to in other areas of the law.
Be it in arbitration, the ability to reverse transfers of assets
arranged prior to a divorce, or even the ability of the family
courts to invade longstanding family trusts, suffice it to say,
if it concerns a marriage, particularly one which is breaking
down, increasingly the chances are that family law principles
will be dominant.