header-logo header-logo

15 January 2009 / Roger Smith
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Procedure & practice , Human rights , ADR
printer mail-detail

Civil engineering

Roger Smith assesses civil justice reform at home and abroad
 

Dame Hazel Genn, newly appointed as dean of University College London’s law department, last month delivered three sparkling Hamlyn lectures that pleaded the cause of civil justice with some vigour. She was particularly waspish about mediation, to which she devoted a whole lecture. It was, she said, “not just about settlement: it is just about settlement”.

Her criticism of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is particularly damning because Dame Hazel is a long-time serious researcher in the field. She published a study of out of court settlement in personal injury cases in 1987 and was responsible for no less than three studies on mediation for the Ministry of Justice since 1998. But now she has had enough. The “growing ADR profession” is building up a practice at the lucrative top end of commercial disputes, ignoring smaller claims. Meanwhile, the government seeks to encourage ADR simply to keep down legal aid costs. Civil justice reform has become dominated by the desire to divert cases

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll