header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
28 November 2019 / Bryan Clark
Issue: 7866 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail

Lomax v Lomax & the future of compulsory mediation

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll