header-logo header-logo

Mediation finally comes of age

21 May 2010
Issue: 7418 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Sector activity doubles in the past three years according to CEDR research
Commercial and civil mediation in the UK has grown by 30%, and mediation activity as whole has doubled, in the last three years according to the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution’s (CEDR) fourth Mediation Audit.

New research by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution, published last week, reveals that approximately 6,000 mainstream commercial and civil cases mediated in the last year. This figure does not include workplace or small claims mediations. The total case value was £5.1bn, an increase of £1bn in the last three years.

Mediation works nine times out of ten, with about three quarters of cases settling on the day, and a further 14% settling shortly afterwards.
Clients usually make direct contact with mediators, rather than working through service organisations, and the numbers doing this has increased from 60% three years ago to 65%. The more experienced the mediator group, the more likely they are to receive direct referrals.

Even among the more experienced mediators, only 37% practise full-time.However, the fees can be lucrative. Less experienced mediators command average one-day mediation fees of £1,390, which have risen from £1,200 in 2007. Fees for more experienced mediators have risen more than 10% to £3,450 from £3,120 three years ago. About 90 individuals dominate the mediation market, being involved in about 85% of commercial cases.
Mediators blamed non-settlement on “intransigent parties, unrealistic expectations and clients on fishing expeditions”.

Conditional fee agreements (CFAs) were cited as a factor, particularly in personal injury cases, with a number of respondents citing instances “in which, due to high uplifts, claimants’ solicitors costs had become out of all proportion to the other issues in dispute, resulting in an additional barrier to settlement”.

Andy Rogers, CEDR communications manager, comments: “One of the reasons why PI has yet to fully embrace the use of mediation is because a CFA can create an additional party in the negotiations—the claimant solicitor. Mediators say that  it can feel as if the claimant solicitor can have an agenda to achieve the maximum for their client and to ensure they receive the maximum as stipulated in any conditional fee agreement.”
 

Issue: 7418 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll