Refusing to engage in ADR

by Dentons
Contact

Dentons

The courts have repeatedly held that a failure to engage in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and in particular mediation, may constitute unreasonable conduct and therefore risks a costs sanction. A recent Court of Appeal judgment confirms that exceptions exist and potentially widens their scope. Nonetheless, from a practical point of view, parties should remain cautious about refusing to engage in ADR.

The existing position

The established position is that parties are always expected to consider ADR. The courts have consistently indicated that a failure to respond to an invitation to participate in ADR, or a refusal to participate, may be viewed as unreasonable conduct and could result in costs sanctions (see the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and the Court of Appeal judgment of Susan Dunnett v. Railtrack plc). A party that refuses to mediate and then goes on to be successful at trial may find the amount of costs it can recover significantly reduced. If that party loses the trial, it risks paying the other side's costs at the higher, indemnity, rate.

Absolute silence in response to an invitation to ADR is highly likely to be considered unreasonable, even if reasonable grounds to refuse existed (PGF II SA v. OMFS Company 1 Ltd).

Examples exist where a refusal to mediate was deemed reasonable and the costs consequences avoided. The Court of Appeal provided guidelines on what may constitute such reasonable grounds in Halsey v. Milton Keynes General NHS Trust. Nonetheless, the courts' starting position has been that ADR should be considered.

The costs consequences are not automatic. The unreasonable conduct is a factor for the court to consider when exercising its discretion on costs.

Gore v. Naheed and Ahmed

In Gore v. Naheed and Ahmed [2017] EWCA Civ 369, the Court of Appeal considered an appeal relating to a right of way for vehicle access. The claimant, Mr Gore, was successful and awarded his costs. The defendants argued these costs should be reduced due to Mr Gore's failure to engage in mediation.

The Court of Appeal's view was that:

  • A party's desire to have the issue resolved by litigation, rather than mediation, is not necessarily unreasonable, especially when that party is ultimately successful at trial.
  • Even if a failure to engage in ADR was deemed unreasonable, the costs consequences remained at the discretion of the court.
  • Factors to consider when identifying reasonable grounds for refusing mediation included whether the mediation had any realistic prospect of success and whether there were complex questions of law unsuitable for mediation.

What this means

The court's approach in Gore is markedly different from its position in recent years, such as the PGF case. Whilst Gore is consistent with the approach in Halsey (that exceptions to the general rule exist), it is surprising to see the courts row back from promoting ADR.

Although engaging in ADR remains in the best interests of a party in most cases, this highlights the occasional instances where a party may reasonably wish to resist an offer to mediate. An example is where the other side has failed to set out its position in a coherent way, so the mediation appears doomed to fail. (As an aside, such a situation could be dealt with by suggesting the mediation is delayed until the other side explains its case properly.) The Gore judgment may well assist in such circumstances.

The issue for parties is that, given any sanction will still ultimately come down to the court's discretion, uncertainty on costs will exist until the end of the trial. In large complex cases, those costs consequences could easily dwarf the costs of a mediation. The prudent approach remains that parties should remain receptive to offers to mediate. When considering whether there is a good reason to refuse such an offer, the Halsey factors mentioned above may assist. These included:

  • The nature of the dispute: Most cases are suitable for ADR, although there may be an issue that is likely to arise again in future and a party needs a binding precedent to deal with such occurrences.
  • The merits of the case: For instance, if the defendant considers the claimant is using the threat of costs sanctions to extract a settlement, despite the claim being without merit.
  • Other settlement methods have been attempted: This may show that a party is making efforts to engage in ADR but, as the other side has unrealistic views of the merits of its case, mediation is not appropriate.
  • The costs of mediation would be disproportionately high: On very small disputes, a reluctance to mediate is less likely to result in a costs sanction.
  • Delay: For instance, if mediation would require the trial to be adjourned.
  • Whether the mediation had a reasonable prospect of success: The Gore judgment was consistent with this factor.

If a party considers there is a good reason to refuse to mediate, it should fully set out its reasons in writing to the other side. These grounds should be kept under review. If there is doubt, the prudent approach remains to engage in ADR and consider mediation.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dentons | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dentons
Contact
more
less

Dentons on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.