header-logo header-logo

Where now for ADR?

20 June 2019 / Bryan Clark
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR , Mediation
printer mail-detail

Bryan Clark reflects on oversupply in the market & commends the Civil Justice Council proposals for change

  • A joined-up approach is likely to produce the most effective results for ensuring a successful ADR future.

It is some four decades since mediation and other emerging processes from the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) movement of 1960s US began to impact upon these shores. Significant strides have since been made. Training programmes are legion. Mediation has been embedded within civil court rules since the Woolf Reforms were enacted in the late 1990s. A glut of pilot, in-court mediation schemes has been introduced. Mediation Information and Assessment Meetings (MIAMs) are an established feature of family justice.

Yet mediation still, perhaps represents an opportunity lost. Supply outstrips demand. Misunderstanding of the process continues unabated. Barriers to development remain to be surmounted. Matters are not straightforward, however. Wider policy issues and controversies are at play. While excessive adversarialism can lead to economic waste and emotional distress for litigants, the imposition of ADR may jar with fundamental rights

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

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll