Disputes Quick Read - What do practitioners think about making alternative dispute resolution (ADR) compulsory?

Quick read

We reported in August on the report by the Civil Justice Council on the issue of compulsory ADR in civil proceedings. Its final recommendations are expected to be published later this year and it is clear that this is likely to lead to change.

In the meantime, the London Chamber of Arbitration and Mediation in conjunction with Herbert Smith have conducted a survey amongst a cross-section of practitioners.

Key points:

There is general support for mandatory ADR for both civil proceedings and arbitration - reflective of the views already being expressed by members of the judiciary and other policy makers.

There is support for costs penalties or some form of stay of proceedings if a party does not participate in a meaningful way in any mandatory process.
The survey asked about the timing of ADR - the greatest support was for it being early in the procedure and before the expense of document disclosure.
There is support for carve-outs where the kind of relief sought is not compensatory damages.

None of this is particularly surprising but the issue, of course, is how this will all work in practice if it is implemented. The questions we identified in our earlier article remain. It will be interesting to see how the Civil Justice Council navigate the issues these questions raise to suit the very broad range of disputes both in court proceedings and arbitration.