
Failing
to attempt to compromise the claim carries risks which are only
just becoming understood. This note looks at the duty to attempt
to compromise a claim and the courts’ approach to parties
who fail to do so. Although other forms of ADR, such as expert
neutral evaluation (ENE) are used to resolve disputes, in most
cases mediation is the form of ADR employed. For this reason,
this note focuses on the duty to mediate.
The
use of ADR is on the increase. Given the Department of Constitutional
Affairs’ commitment to the Treasury to cut the number of
civil and commercial cases in the courts by 200,000 by April 2006,
ten per cent of the cases annually in the High Court and the County
Courts, there will have to be an increased use of ADR, and in
particular mediation. ADR orders, such as those made in the Commercial
Court, strongly encourage parties to mediate. Such an order was
made in Shirayana Shokosan Company Limited
-v- Danovo Limited (2003) and the wording of the order
was endorsed by the Court of Appeal in Halsey
-v- Milton Keynes NHS Trust (2004), although they
preferred the less robust wording devised by Master Ungley used
in clinical negligence cases. The encouragement and facilitation
of mediation by the courts has been strongly endorsed and clearly
will continue.
The
Court of Appeal in Halsey
has made it clear that the courts will not order an unwilling
party to mediate and there are circumstances in which a party
can reasonably refuse to do so. Noting the European Court of Human
Right`s cautions approach to any interference with a party’s
right of access to a court under Art 6 ECHR, the Court of Appeal
concluded that it is likely that compulsion of ADR would be regarded
as an unacceptable constraint on the right of access to the court.
Even were that not to be the case, they found it difficult to
conceive of circumstances in which it would be appropriate to
compel a party to use ADR.
Halsey
makes clear that a party with a watertight case can reasonably
refuse to mediate and will not be penalised in costs for doing
so. Tactical requests for mediation by claimants, particularly
those with weak or small claims against public authorities affected
by the Government’s pledge in 2001 to use ADR in all suitable
cases, will not be looked on kindly by the courts.
|