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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll