Podcasts, powerpoints and/or papers from the presentations are available to LEADR members and
'kon gres 2011 participants via a password protected area. Click here >>

Understand more about the processes underpinning FDR and collaborative law to ensure parties in dispute can be matched to an appropriate method of dispute resolution.

Whilst family dispute resolution (FDR) has emerged as a critical step in the process of resolving family law matters, another form of ADR has also continued to develop in Australia as a suitable and successful alternative to litigation – collaborative law.

Collaborative law is a relatively new practice here in Australia and is frequently compared to mediation, as it is also seen as an alternative to the adversarial system and incorporates some of the mediation tools and skills to deal with family and parenting issues. Where it differs from FDR, is that rather than it being provided by a neutral, independent third party, it is a practice that is firmly established within the law and provided by lawyers as a negotiated-based approach to the practice of law.

As the legislative framework starts to crystallise around the development and delivery of ADR services, particularly with regards to FDR, it is now an opportune time to take stock of the differences and similarities between FDR and collaborative law, as well as the disadvantages and advantages of each process and practice.

Understanding their application in the context of family law matters will assist in educating potential parties in dispute to identify the process most suitable for their situation. It will also assist practitioners in identifying the most suitable process for dealing with critical issues such as power imbalances and high levels of conflict, as well as identifying the causes of conflict and ensuring that they are adequately managed.

This session is about exploring the similarities and differences between FDR and Collaborative Law and understanding the processes that underpin each practice in order to ensure parties in dispute can be matched to an appropriate method of dispute resolution.

It is also an opportunity to discuss the principles, objectives, advantages and disadvantages of each practice and their effectiveness in the field of FDR. Kate is interested in developing a lively debate and her research will challenge your thinking around the role of the neutral, third party and other key ADR principles that continue to be hot topics for debate.

Podcast: Listen to Kate talk about this session pre-kon gres (7 mins) >>