header-logo header-logo

05 June 2008 / Duncan Henderson
Issue: 7324 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

Unsettling questions

Refusing to mediate can be a dangerous and expensive option, says Duncan Henderson

New versions of the allocation questionnaire used in civil proceedings in England and Wales (forms N150 and N151) were published on 1 April 2008. Section A dealing with settlement has been expanded in each case. The amendments were not mentioned in the 46th update to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). The new s A is clearly designed to stimulate change in the behaviour of litigants and their advisers towards alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and in particular mediation.

Any practitioner advising a client against trying to settle a claim at the pre-allocation stage (before the hearing) now has to give and put on record justifiable reasons for the answer, and any client who wants to say “no” for reasons which are not justifiable (or to leave the box blank because there is no good reason for refusal) will have to be warned of the costs penalties which an unreasonable refusal to go to ADR may attract.

Halsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust
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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll