In an exclusive series of updates for NLJ, Tony Allen presents an alternative thesis on the shape of future dispute resolution
- Post-Halsey, can a court order parties to mediate against their will?
- What is the current position in relation to court-ordered dispute resolution (DR).
The law relating to mediation has for many years felt dominated by the Court of Appeal judgment in Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576, [2004] 4 All ER 920. It dates from 2004, two years after another dramatic Court of Appeal decision—Dunnett v Railtrack plc (in railway administration) [2002] EWCA Civ 303, [2002] 2 All ER 850—when for the first time a winning party’s refusal to mediate was sanctioned as unreasonable litigation conduct (CPR 44.2). Halsey purported to generate authoritative guidance on two main topics:
(i) Can a court order parties to mediate against their will? And
(ii) On what basis might a costs sanction be imposed on a winning party who had unreasonably
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
