CONFLICT RESOLUTION: MEDIATION, MENTORING & COACHING
Finding Resolution, One Hump at a Time.
ADR isn't much of a choice
The changing landscape:
The 2000s: Parties should consider mediation
The 2010s: Parties are obligated to consider mediation.
The 2020s: Parties can be ordered to mediate.
Compulsory mediation (or other ADR) is now part of our dispute process supported by the government and the judiciary in the battle to keep costs down for the public purse. It's not all about penny-pinching though, ADR works.
If you - or your disputant - needs convincing, here's a round of the 2020s case law and the CPR.
Assensus Limited v Wirsol Energy Limited [2025] EWHC 503 (KB)
The Issue:
Costs. Whether the losing party (Assensus) should get out of paying Wirsol's legal costs when Wirsol had refused Assensus' offer to mediate.
Both parties had made Part 36 offers to settle in the life of the dispute.
DHK Retail Ltd. & Others v City Football Group Limited [2024] EWHC 3231 (Ch)
The issue:
Was the promotional branding of Asashi Super ‘Dry’ 0.0% lager (City’s sponsor) confusing with the SuperDry clothing brand (not City’s sponsor). One party wanted mediation, the other didn’t.
Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416
The Issue:
Originally pesky Japanese knotweed but no-one cares about that. Spreading like wildfire is the change to the legal landscape. As part of the dispute, one party argued that the other should have explored non-court resolution and that court should have been a last resort.
Stoney-Anderson v Abbas & Ors [2023] EWHC 2964 (Ch)
The Issue:
An executor fought his corner to stay as executor despite all wanting him gone. All parties were set to mediate and then one of them backed-out. Protracted litigation and the inevitable high legal costs and lengthy court resource time followed. Who should pay?
CPR changes October 2024
Part 1.1 (f) promoting or using alterative dispute resolution
Part 1.4 (e) ordering or encouraging the parties to use an alternative dispute resolution procedure if the court considers that appropriate and facilitating the use of such procedure.
Part 3.1 (o) order the parties to engage in alternative dispute resolution.
Part 29.2 (1A) when giving directions the court must consider whether to order or encourage the parties to engage in alterative dispute resolution.
Part 44.2(e) when deciding discretion as to costs, the conduct of the parties includes whether a party failed to comply with an order for alternative dispute resolution, or unreasonably failed to engage in alterative dispute resolution.
A dispute is an opportunity for growth.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details in the privacy policy and accept the service to view the translations.