What is your ADR Strategy? Do you have an ADR Strategy?
How would you respond to a “Notice to Mediate”?
All of these questions about mediation were raised by the recommendations of the Civil Justice Council in its report on ADR and Civil Justice published just before Christmas. Leading mediator, Terry Renouf, considers the implications of the Report now that it has been accepted by the Master of the Rolls. Spring 2019 will see the first step to a new ADR regime when the members of a Judicial ADR Liaison Committee are appointed.
In consequence settlement strategies will need to be reviewed, as this and other recommendations will compel parties to give earlier consideration to mediation, certify that clients are aware of ADR and narrow the instances where a failure to mediate is acceptable to the Courts. These changes will result in mediation being used more often in civil disputes – with adverse costs orders being used as the “incentive” to encourage mediation.
Whilst negotiation will undoubtedly remain the predominant means of resolution changes, Court Rules will require parties to consider mediation at an earlier stage in the dispute process. It should not be left to the point where everything else has been tried and a trial looming.
An ADR strategy will be needed virtually from the point first instruction. The CJC report states that a simple informal discussion of possible settlement will not be regarded as an adequate attempt at ADR by the Courts.
With costs consequences the probable sanction, it will be far better to be on the front foot rather than reacting to your opponent or the Court – even where it is likely that the traditional route of negotiations will achieve settlement.
There is considerable judicial support at the highest level for the reforms recommended. They may take some time to fully come to fruition, but the first steps have been taken – and others will follow with changes to Court Rules each October / April.
It would be unsafe to assume that the changes will not affect a complex claim started today. Lawyers should therefore have an ADR strategy in place from the outset to take advantage of these recommendations. This will mean being ready to explore risk and explore the settlement opportunities that may be available for the client.
You may also want to read
- Dispute Resolution for the ‘20s – link to https://www.temple-legal.co.uk/news/dispute-resolution-for-20s/
- Mediation for Clinical Negligence claims – An ATE Underwriter’s perspective – link to https://www.temple-legal.co.uk/news/mediation-for-clinical-negligence-claims-an-ate-underwriters-perspective/
David was Director of Temple’s Underwriting Division for 14 years during which time he supported Temple’s coverholders with his exceptional knowledge, expert guidance and friendly countenance.
He is now a Non-Executive member of the board supporting the strategic direction of the company and attending key events and meetings with our customers.
David has spent over 40 years as a Legal Executive specialising in personal injury litigation. Initially, he was a claimant litigator pursuing leading industrial accident and disease cases.
As an Associate at Davies Arnold Cooper for over a decade he managed a team of lawyers and acted for defendants in personal injury and general insurance litigation. In this role, he became involved in the early development of the ATE market, assisting the ABI in their involvement in the Court of Appeal test cases such as Callery v Gray.
As the London representative for FOIL he was involved in the liability insurers’ approach to ATE and worked with the government and judiciary in several key consultations. He was a member of the CILEX National Council for over 15 years and was CILEX President in 1995/6.
Read articles by David Pipkin