header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Lomax v Lomax & the future of compulsory mediation

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
28 November 2019 / Bryan Clark
Issue: 7866 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail
12265
Bryan Clark provides a backdrop to the current law & practice around compulsory mediation
  • Compulsory mediation can be criticised on practical and policy grounds and significant barriers to mediation exist in legal circles and also with litigants.
  • However, mediation can be successful even when parties do not enter the process under their own steam.

There have been few issues more controversial in the English civil justice arena than compulsory mediation. Over recent years, a broad range of opinions has been voiced and much ink spilt over this matter. While the official position remains in England and Wales that compulsory mediation is not sanctioned, the recent Court of Appeal case of Lomax v Lomax [2019] EWCA Civ 1467, [2019] All ER (D) 87 (Aug) has again thrust the issue into the spotlight and may be seen as a catalyst for change. This article provides a backdrop to the current law and practice around compulsory mediation in England and Wales, reviews the decision in Lomax and

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Kingsley Napley—Paul Davidoff

Kingsley Napley—Paul Davidoff

Partner joins as lead of international tax desk

Reed Smith—Michael Darowski

Reed Smith—Michael Darowski

International arbitration partner joins disputes team in London

Shakespeare Martineau — 12 newly qualified solicitors

Shakespeare Martineau — 12 newly qualified solicitors

Firm celebrates strong retention and new talent across practice areas

NEWS
Read All
Long wait ahead for improvement in parental leave
MPs have expressed disappointment after the government confirmed it will not consider updating the parental leave system until at least 2027
NLJ this week: Righting Libor wrongs
In July, the Supreme Court quashed the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, ruling that trial judges had wrongly directed juries to treat profit-motivated Libor submissions as inherently dishonest. In this week’s NLJ, David Stern and James Fletcher of 5 St Andrew’s Hill reflect on the decision
NLJ this week: Back to (costs) basics
David Bailey-Vella of Davis Woolfe and chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers explores the new costs budgeting light pilot scheme in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Gaslighting & post-separation assets
In this week's issue of NLJ, Emma Brunning and Dharshica Thanarajasingham of Birketts unpack the high-conflict financial remedy case TF v SF [2025] EWHC 1659 (Fam). The husband’s conduct—described by the judge as a ‘masterclass in gaslighting’—included hiding a £9.5m deferred payment from the sale of a port acquired post-separation. Despite his claims that the port was non-matrimonial, the court found its value rooted in marital assets and efforts
NLJ this week: Lord Neuberger on assisted dying
Lord Neuberger, former president of the Supreme Court, shares his views on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in this week's NLJ with William Raven
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll