Mediation/Consent Order

My STBX and I have attended 2 mediation sessions and agreed a settlement figure. At first this was a huge relief, but now I can't stop worrying about the Consent Order and whether the judge might order me to pay him more than the agreed sum. We reached an agreement based on what we think is fair, but if the judge disagrees, are they likely to overrule it? I'm hoping that as we both went through the mediation process with financial disclosure and both agreed on this sum, the judge will be satisfied and grant the Consent Order, but as I don't know of any other cases similar to ours I'm wondering how often they go through and how often the judge rules something different.

The judge will read the order to see if it falls within the basic criteria of mca s25, if it does no problem, if you both sort independent legal advice before signing the order a judge will rarely question it, if the judge has any questions you will probably be invited to short hearing with the judge who will just make sure you both fully understand what you are agreeing too,

This happened to myself and the ex, the hearing lasted about 7 minutes and once over the judge sealed the order there and then.

Thank you Dukey, it was also a short marriage so hopefully that will go in my favour. I have a solicitor, but he only saw one for the free half-hour so may not seek any more legal advice. What worries me is, I have assets and he doesn't so although I've always been careful with money and he hasn't, the judge might want to split everything down the middle.

When you submit a draft consent order to court it is either ratified or it isn't. Sometimes the judge will hold a short hearing to ensure both parties understand the implications of the order before signing it off but the judge will not 'overule' unless Ancillary Relief is contested.

The sharing of assets isn't determined by a mathematical split. After a long marriage equality is the yardstick settlements are measured against. A spouse who stayed at home to raise family is likely to require a larger share of capital to leave them on the a similar financial footing because the breadwinner is able to raise a larger mortgage.

With a short childless marriage the courts would look more towards the parties taking away what they brought to the marriage with perhaps the party with more resources paying *something* towards the costs of the other spouse rehousing and readjusting.

You have made an agreement you are both happy with so the judge will need a reason to refuse to seal the order.

Only a judge after a final hearing can impose a settlement so don`t worry about that.

If the marriage was short you both usually leave with what you brought.

It`s best not to worry about what can go wrong for the sake of your sanity, if you are asked to attend a hearing just make it clear to the judge you both understand the agreement and are happy with and all should be well.

OK, I will try not to worry - thanks for clarifying

Thanks Fiona, that makes me feel less uneasy - I might make it through this without becoming a basketcase after all!