header-logo header-logo

08 October 2021 / Tony Allen
Issue: 7951 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , ADR , Mediation
printer mail-detail

The final demise of Halsey?

60020
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 850when 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

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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