header-logo header-logo

Compulsory ADR: no longer alternative?

11 August 2023 / Thomas H Curran
Issue: 8037 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR , International
printer mail-detail
133389
Mechanisms for mandatory alternative dispute resolution are already commonplace around the world: is it finally the turn of England & Wales? Thomas H Curran considers the changing landscape ahead
  • In 2004, the Court of Appeal ruled in Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust that compulsory alternative dispute resolution (ADR) unacceptably restricts rights of access to the courts. Halsey will finally be reconsidered by the courts later this year.
  • Courts throughout Europe and the Americas have already introduced measures to encourage and even require litigants to participate in various ADR processes.

On the heels of the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) report on compulsory alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which ultimately concluded that compulsory ADR is both legal and to be encouraged under the laws of England and Wales, the Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos made it clear that ‘ADR should no longer be viewed as an “alternative” but as an integral part of the dispute resolution process; that process should focus on “resolution” rather than “dispute”’.

Now,

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll