header-logo header-logo

11 August 2023 / Thomas H Curran
Issue: 8037 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR , International
printer mail-detail

Compulsory ADR: no longer alternative?

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
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?
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
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
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll