header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The final demise of Halsey? Pt 2

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
15 October 2021 / Tony Allen
Issue: 7952 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , ADR , Mediation
printer mail-detail
60705
Tony Allen continues his series on the future of dispute resolution by exploring the concept (& reality) of compulsory ADR
  • Is it now ‘legal’ for a court to order alternative dispute resolution (ADR)?
  • How courts might approach the question of ordering DR and imposing sanctions if ignored.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) report, Compulsory ADR, published in June 2021 raises a significant challenge to the correctness of Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576, [2004] All ER (D) 125 (May) over its assertion that for a court to order (A)DR breaches the ECHR Art 6 right to a public trial. It looks first at the theoretical legality of ordering (A)DR (and thus whether Halsey was in this respect wrong): it then looks at the desirability of court-ordered alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Its answer to the theoretical legality of court-ordered ADR is firmly that such orders are legal. Deweer v Belgium 1980 EHRR 439 is waved away as not really being relevant.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Mourant—Stephen Alexander

Mourant—Stephen Alexander

Jersey litigation lead appointed to global STEP Council

mfg Solicitors—nine trainees

mfg Solicitors—nine trainees

Firm invests in future talent with new training cohort

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Traders’ convictions quashed in Libor shock
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
NLJ this week: Small firms call for tech clarity as AI looms
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Trans pool player loses discrimination fight
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Pro bono power without the red tape
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Fraud claims climb as courts brace for AI threats
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll