Round Table Meeting: Settle It in One Day, Not One Year

Part of: Mediation Costs: What Family Mediation Really Costs

Settling it yourselves, with a lawyer each

A round table meeting is a without prejudice settlement meeting where you and your former partner each attend with your own lawyer. Together you try to resolve everything in a single sitting: the money, the children, or both. Nobody chairs it. There is no judge, no mediator and no neutral evaluator. The only people involved are the two of you and the two legal teams. So any deal you reach is one you have agreed, not one imposed on you.

That is the appeal, and it is also the risk. A day that goes well can end a financial dispute that would otherwise have taken eighteen months. A day that goes badly can leave you tied to terms you did not fully understand. That is because family law treats a negotiated settlement very differently from an ordinary contract.

What is a round table meeting?

People also call it a lawyer-led negotiation meeting, or simply a without prejudice meeting. Either way, it is a face-to-face negotiation between separating couples and their legal teams, held outside the court process. It usually takes place at one firm’s offices, or by video. Each side may have a private room with the lawyers moving between them. Alternatively everyone sits together, depending on how comfortable the parties are.

There is no statutory definition and no court form to start one. It is simply a way of running a negotiation that would otherwise happen in letters. The meeting compresses it into a few hours, with everyone available to answer questions on the spot. That compression is the point. A proposal that takes three weeks to answer by post can go through testing, costing and revision four times in an afternoon.

In family law, people use it for two very different kinds of dispute. In a financial settlement after divorce it is the standard way of trying to settle before, or instead of, a contested hearing. For children cases, it helps build a workable arrangement that the two of you can actually live with. That means school holidays, handovers and term-time routines, which a court order rarely captures as well.

How does a round table meeting work?

It works in three phases: preparation, negotiation, and recording what you agreed. The preparation is the part that decides the outcome, and it is the part most people underestimate.

Before the day. Both sides exchange financial disclosure, or the relevant information about the children, so that everyone is negotiating on the same facts. In a money case this normally means a completed Form E from each of you with the supporting documents. There is practical guidance on getting that right in our note on managing financial disclosure effectively. Each side also sends its agenda and opening position in advance. If you go into the room without knowing what the other side actually owns, you are not negotiating — you are guessing.

On the day. Typically you start in separate rooms. The lawyers meet, narrow the issues and carry offers back and forth. They consult you on every move, and they concede nothing without your instruction. Some couples join for part of it, particularly in children cases where the tone matters. Meetings commonly run four to six hours. They end in a deal, or a deal on most issues with a short list of what is left. Otherwise they end in an honest recognition that it is not going to settle today.

Afterwards. The lawyers write up what you agreed, normally as heads of terms signed at the end of the day. Sometimes it is a summary letter sent the same evening instead. They then convert it into whatever document makes it stick. That conversion step is where round table meetings most often go wrong.

Is a round table meeting non-court dispute resolution?

Yes. The definition in the Family Procedure Rules is expressly open-ended. A round table meeting is a method of resolving a dispute other than through the court process. But there is a wrinkle on the court form that catches people out. It is worth knowing before you fill it in.

Rule 2.3(1) lists mediation, arbitration, evaluation by a neutral third party and collaborative law as examples, prefaced by “including but not limited to”. A lawyer-led negotiation meeting is not named, but the list does not purport to be exhaustive. Form FM5, however, is the form the court uses to ask what you have tried. Its own guidance note explains that non-court dispute resolution “means using a third party to help resolve your dispute(s) outside of court”. Its tick-list offers mediation, arbitration, neutral evaluation, collaborative law and “Other (please provide the name)”. A round table meeting has no third party at all. In practice it goes under “Other”, described plainly, with the dates.

Why the 2024 rule changes matter

The 2024 rule changes gave family dispute resolution outside court real teeth. Under rule 3.3(1) the court “must consider, at every stage in proceedings, whether non-court dispute resolution is appropriate”. Rule 3.3(1A), in force since 29 April 2024, also allows the court to require a party to file a form setting out their views on using it. The FM5 form itself says the applicant and the respondent must each complete their own copy. Each must return it to the court at least seven working days before the first hearing, with a copy to the other party. Being able to say truthfully that you proposed a meeting, and what came of it, is worth having on that form.

One correction is worth making, because a good deal of commentary still repeats the old position. The court no longer has an express power under rule 3.4 to adjourn a case for non-court dispute resolution only “where the parties agree”. The rule changed on 29 April 2024 and now carries the heading “Timetabling proceedings: encouraging non-court dispute resolution”. The consent wording has gone. The power to adjourn a hearing now sits in the court’s general case management powers at rule 4.1(3)(c). A judge can pause your case to let you try to settle whether or not you both want to.

Do I have to attend a round table meeting?

No. No rule compels you to attend, and nobody can force you to settle. But refusing to engage with non-court dispute resolution at all now carries a direct financial risk in money cases. That is a different question from whether this particular meeting is right for you.

In financial remedy proceedings the starting point under rule 28.3(5) is that each side pays their own costs. Rule 28.3(6) lets the court depart from that because of a party’s conduct. Since 29 April 2024, rule 28.3(7)(aa) also requires the court to have regard to “any failure by a party, without good reason, to — (i) attend a MIAM… or (ii) attend non-court dispute resolution”. Practice Direction 28A, paragraph 4.4, puts it more bluntly: the court “will take a broad view of conduct for the purposes of this rule and will generally conclude that to refuse openly to negotiate reasonably and responsibly will amount to conduct in respect of which the court will consider making an order for costs”.

There are good reasons to decline. Where there has been domestic abuse, coercive control or a serious imbalance of power, being in the same building can be unsafe. It can also be unproductive, and shuttle mediation or a fully remote process is usually the better route. Where disclosure is incomplete, a meeting simply converts a document problem into an argument. “Good reason” is a real category — but it needs to be a reason you can state, not silence.

What “without prejudice” really means at the meeting

A without prejudice meeting means nobody can later show the judge deciding your case the offers and concessions made in it. That protection is what lets people move. It is also narrower than most people assume. In family money cases it has one consequence that surprises almost everybody. Our guide to without prejudice save as to costs and Calderbank offers sets out how people give up that protection on purpose.

In financial remedy proceedings, rule 28.3(8) states that “no offer to settle which is not an open offer to settle is admissible at any stage of the proceedings”, subject to one narrow exception. Practice Direction 28A, paragraph 4.3, spells out the effect: the court “will not be able to take into account any offers to settle expressed to be ‘without prejudice’ or ‘without prejudice save as to costs’ in deciding what, if any, costs orders to make”. So a generous without prejudice offer made across the table does not protect you on costs. If you want an offer to count, you have to make it openly. That is a tactical decision, not an administrative one. It belongs in the planning before the meeting rather than in the room.

Two limits on the protection

Two further limits are worth knowing. Protection attaches to genuine attempts to settle. It does not attach to facts that exist independently of the meeting. Nor does it extend to information a court would need in order to protect a child. Form FM5 itself also carries a reminder for when you later explain to the court why the process did not work. You “should not provide details of confidential discussions that took place during” it. It is fine to tell the judge that you tried and it failed. You cannot tell the judge what anyone offered.

Is a round table meeting legally binding?

Not on the day, and not in the way most people mean. An agreement reached in a round table meeting about finances is not an ordinary enforceable contract. Yet the family court may still hold you to it before anything is sealed. That is a stranger and more important position than “binding” or “not binding” suggests.

The leading case is Xydhias v Xydhias [1999] 1 FLR 683. A 2025 judgment restated its principles in H v W (Xydhias Agreements) [2025] EWFC 163 (B). Ordinary contractual principles do not apply in deciding whether there is an agreement to compromise financial claims. Such an agreement does not give rise to a contract enforceable in law. Instead the court has a discretion to decide whether the parties reached an accord. It also decides whether to hold them to it. The same judgment confirms that signed heads of terms are not a precondition. A court can hold you to a deal you never signed.

Put practically, you cannot sue your former partner for breaking the deal. But you may not be able to walk away from it either. If you need to reopen it, you are asking a judge to use a discretion, not using a right of your own. That asymmetry is why we do not let clients leave a round table meeting with a vague “agreement in principle”. Our guide to Xydhias agreements goes through what counts as a concluded accord.

How to settle a divorce out of court and make it stick

An agreement becomes enforceable only when the court turns it into an order. The route is completely different for money and for child arrangements.

Money. You apply for a financial consent order. Rule 9.26 requires you to file two copies of the draft order. One must carry a statement signed by the respondent signifying agreement. Each party must also file and serve a statement of information, which is Form D81. Under section 33A of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, a judge may then make the order in the terms agreed “unless it has reason to think that there are other circumstances into which it ought to inquire”. That last clause is the one that catches badly drafted deals. A judge who cannot see why the split is fair will ask, and the answer has to be on the D81. The fee is £62. Our guides to the financial consent order and to what happens once it is sealed take that further.

Making child arrangements enforceable

Children. A parenting plan has no legal force at all. It is a written understanding, and extremely useful for showing a court what you both thought was workable. But nobody can enforce it. To make arrangements enforceable you need a child arrangements order. It is defined by section 8 of the Children Act 1989 as an order regulating with whom, and when, a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact. Even by consent the court is not a rubber stamp. section 1(5) says the court shall not make an order “unless it considers that doing so would be better for the child than making no order at all”. Many well-functioning round table agreements about children are deliberately left as a plan for exactly that reason. Which of the two you want is a decision with consequences, and it is worth making it on purpose.

The law here is the same across England and Wales. The Family Procedure Rules, the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and the Children Act 1989 all extend to England and Wales. The court fees are identical, and there is no separate Welsh procedure for any of this. The practical differences are travel, listing times and which court hears your case.

What happens if a round table meeting fails?

Nobody can use what you offered against you, and the case simply continues. But the meeting is rarely wasted, because it usually narrows what is genuinely in dispute.

If proceedings have not started, the next step in a money case is an application for a financial order (£321 where it is not by consent). In a children case it is a C100 application (£270), which leads to a first hearing dispute resolution appointment. Before issuing a children application you will normally need to have attended a mediation information and assessment meeting. There is an exemption under rule 3.8(1)(d) where you attended a non-court dispute resolution process about the same, or substantially the same, dispute in the previous four months. But Practice Direction 3A, paragraph 21A, requires evidence in a specific form: “written confirmation from the non-court dispute resolution provider that the prospective applicant has attended”. At a round table meeting there is no independent provider to give that confirmation. Do not assume a meeting removes the requirement; plan on the basis that it does not.

If proceedings are already running, the practical consequence is filing your Form FM5. The court will also see what you did when it comes to consider costs at the end.

Round table meeting, mediation or arbitration: which fits?

They solve different problems, and the choice usually turns on whether you need help talking, help deciding, or neither.

The routes also combine. Plenty of cases run a round table meeting after online mediation has closed the gap but left two issues open. Others use child-inclusive mediation first so that the children’s own views are in the room when the adults negotiate. Choosing well at the start is one of the biggest single influences on what the whole thing costs. It also affects whether you can still speak to each other afterwards. That matters more than people believe at the time, as our note on avoiding an acrimonious divorce sets out.

Frequently asked questions

How long does a round table meeting take?

Most run between three and six hours, but lawyers book a full day so that nobody is negotiating against the clock. Complex financial cases occasionally need a second session. Usually that is because a valuation or a pension figure was missing, not because the parties were far apart.

Do both people have to have a lawyer?

No rule requires it, and a meeting can be held where one person represents themselves. But the format assumes each side has advice, and without that it can become one-sided very quickly. The person without a lawyer has nobody to tell them whether an offer is reasonable. Meanwhile the other side’s lawyer cannot advise them both. Where one party has no lawyer, the meeting needs a different structure, with more in writing and more time.

Can we deal with the children and the money in the same meeting?

Yes, and it is often sensible, because the two are connected. Where the children live usually drives what happens to the house. In practice most meetings take them in separate sessions, so that a disagreement about one does not contaminate the other.

What should I bring to a round table meeting?

Your disclosure and your priorities, in that order. Bring the documents behind any figure you intend to rely on. Know which three things matter most to you, and have a realistic idea of what you would accept rather than litigate. Also bring a list of the things nobody can decide on the day, so you can park them rather than argue.

Is a round table meeting confidential?

The negotiations take place without prejudice, so the judge deciding your case never sees the offers made in them. That protection covers genuine attempts to settle. It does not cover facts that exist independently of the meeting. Nor does it extend to information a court would need in order to protect a child.

Do I still need a court order if we agree everything?

For finances, yes. Without a sealed order the financial claims arising from the marriage stay open, sometimes for decades. Either of you can revive them later. For children, not necessarily. Section 1(5) of the Children Act 1989 discourages orders that are not needed. So a working parenting plan may be the better outcome. Which applies to you is worth ten minutes of advice rather than a guess.

Can a round table meeting be held remotely?

Yes. Video meetings with private breakout rooms work well and cost less in travel. They are often easier where one person is anxious about being in the same building. However, they demand tighter preparation, because the informal corridor conversation that unlocks a deal in person does not happen by itself online.