Mr. Keith Walsh:

We certainly fully agree with the Rape Crisis Network's argument that it should not be used where there is domestic violence or allegations of sexual violence.

An alternative dispute resolution, ADR, mechanism is suitable for use in some areas, but we agree that it is totally unsuitable in this area. We have a policy against it. It may be worth dividing up family law into two or three areas. The Circuit Court deals primarily with legal separation and divorce cases, while the District Court deals with public law cases, namely, childcare, taking children into care, as well as access, custody and guardianship cases which are primarily non-marital. There is already a division within the court system in that the Circuit Court deals with people who are married and all of their problems as a bundle in divorce or judicial separation proceedings, while the District Court deals with people who are unmarried in the context of guardianship and, separately, maintenance cases and, separately again, custody issues. There are also public law childcare cases which involve taking children into care. There are a variety of others, but they are the headline areas. If there are no allegations of sexual violence or other such issues, an ADR mechanism could be trialled in divorce and judicial separation proceedings. The primary issues in judicial separation and divorce cases are money and children. This can be done, either before going to court or afterwards but ideally as soon as possible.

As I said, the District Court deals with custody and guardianship cases. Again, an ADR mechanism would be suitable for use in the majority of these cases and should be tried. We might not solve everything via an ADR mechanism, but we might have a number of issues netted or resolved. An ADR mechanism would not necessarily be suitable for use in public law cases because the decisions are binary. In other words, either the child will be taken into care or he or she will not. There may be a voluntary element. An ADR mechanism works on a case by case basis. Generally, where possible, it reduces the resources required by the courts system, but it does require the provision of alternative resources. It would not be possible to operate it without an additional judge or two, but if it was resourced properly in the longer term, it will definitely pay dividends. Most importantly, it would reduce the legal costs involved for the parties and speed up the timeframe required to resolve all of the issues involved.