header-logo header-logo

Do not pass go

15 April 2016 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7694 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail
001_nlj_7694_burns

Martin Burns considers the situations when mediation may be unsuitable

Mediation is a practical and sensible method for resolving an immense range of disputes. There is plenty of first-hand testimony to demonstrate the effectiveness of mediation, and it is increasingly being used in both commercial and consumer markets.

It is particularly useful where parties want to be in charge of the process and timetable, and retain control over the ultimate decision on their dispute. Mediation is nearly always the right way to go when parties believe their differences can be resolved through discussion, and they are willing to cooperate in finding solutions.

Parties often want to resolve their differences in private, particularly if they are worried about the possibility of commercially sensitive or personal issues becoming public, as would happen if their dispute ended up in court. Mediation is especially attractive where there is desire to maintain continuing relationships, which could be damaged in adversarial forums such as arbitration or litigation.

But mediation may not always be suitable. There are certain situations where

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll