header-logo header-logo

Mediation training

01 April 2010
Issue: 7411 & 7412 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The new president of the Association of District Judges (ADJ) has called for all district judges to be trained in mediation.

Judge Monty Trent, ADJ president, says: “It is high time for mediation and other alternative dispute resolution techniques to be part of the armoury of every civil court in higher value cases.

“Instead of private or court-annexed mediation, district judges should be trained as mediators and employ their skills in achieving settlements.

In heavy civil litigation where the parties have been unable to negotiate a settlement within three months of proceedings having commenced, judges should be able to call the parties in for a neutral evaluation in the same way we do in family cases.

Judges are highly experienced lawyers with many years of successful practice behind them. Above all they are trusted neutrals and the ideal people to sit down with the parties themselves and help them resolve their disputes.”

Judge Trent, who sits at the Mayor’s and City of London Court and was formerly based at West London and Barnet county courts, has been a full time judge for 18 years. He intends to press for legislation to make civil enforcement machinery more effective.

Describing current systems of enforcement as a “mess”, he said: “One of the great weaknesses of the court system is its failure effectively to enforce its own court orders.”

He also expressed concern about the “dilapidated” state of county court buildings.

Curbs on justice expenditure, dilapidated courts and heavy staff turnover meant the system was “beginning to creak alarmingly”, he warned, with regular complaints of delays, mistakes and missing files.
“We can expect more court closures impeding the public’s access to local justice in cases that can sometimes change peoples’ lives as, if not more, fundamentally than a prison sentence.

“Courts are confronted with heavy staff turnover and constant cuts. As staff leave, they are rarely replaced. This leads to inexperience and sometimes illness. Remaining staff struggle to cope with a mountain of paper and work.”

 

Issue: 7411 & 7412 / 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