Deborah David compares & contrasts US & UK mediation styles
There is no limitation on general damages in the US (except in clinical negligence cases), and cases are typically tried by jury. For US defendants, the risks of a jury trial in terms of quantum exceed those in the UK. Still, uncertainty remains whenever the facts are submitted for determination to a third party. For every litigant delighted by the results, there is an opposing litigant who had confidently predicted a different outcome.
In CN cases, the US healthcare system discourages early mediation to a greater degree than does the UK system. Physicians are independent contractors, and the liability policies insuring them contain a clause preventing settlement without their consent. Physicians on whose behalf a payment is made are reported to a data bank where the information is available to the public. Consequently, doctors frequently withhold consent, making mediation pointless. However, in those cases that do mediate, the settlement rates are in the range of 80%.
In the UK, with its national healthcare, logic suggests that mediation of CN cases should be more frequent. That,
