header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007 / Chloe Carswell
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Features , Mediation
printer mail-detail

Inside mediation

When will courts waive the without prejudice rule for mediation? Chloe Carswell reports

The courts have wholeheartedly embraced mediation since it was enshrined in the Civil Procedure Rules in 1999. Case law including Dunnett v Railtrack plc (in railway administration) [2002] EWCA Civ 303, [2002] 2 All ER 850 and Burchell v Bullard [2005] EWCA Civ 358, [2005] All ER (D) 62 (Apr) demonstrates that the courts will not hesitate to apply costs sanctions to parties who unreasonably refuse to mediate.

The benefits of mediation are clear. It is a flexible process with a neutral third party who tries to facilitate a settlement of the dispute. It is a (relatively) cheap and swift method of dispute resolution which allows for creative solutions not otherwise available through the courts, and which allows for quasi-direct negotiation between parties. Perhaps most importantly, it is confidential, without prejudice and non-binding—unless and until there is a signed settlement agreement.

A FORM OF PRIVILEGE

The “without prejudice” rule exists to encourage parties to reach a settlement of a dispute without fear of anything said during the course of settlement discussion—particularly concessions

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll