header-logo header-logo

14 December 2012 / Steven O'Sullivan
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , ADR
printer mail-detail

The right approach

Intransigence has no place at the mediation table, says Steven O’Sullivan

As someone who defends claims against solicitors for a living, I am quite a fan of mediation. It can be a great alternative to the expensive roulette wheel of litigation, allowing parties to determine their own settlement rather than having a solution imposed upon them by a third party. Entrenched views can be challenged not just by the opposition, but by an objective third party (the mediator) who, if skilful, can make the parties wake up to the problems and risks involved with their case. However, mediation can be pointless unless the parties involved approach the process constructively. I want to illustrate this point with a particularly bad experience that I had at a mediation recently.

A case in point

The facts of the case are complex and involve multiple parties. One of those parties, the claimant, is a lender who (generally) is a multiple victim of negligence by professionals. Thus they are no strangers to this type of claim. The other

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll