ADR: Counting the costs

In an article for New Law Journal, John McElroy, Partner at Fieldfisher and President of the LSLA, and Dr Kirstie Imber, Associate at Fieldfisher, examine the evolving role of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in civil litigation and the potential costs consequences of refusing to engage.

The authors explore how recent amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules, following Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, have strengthened the courts’ powers to require parties to engage in ADR. Drawing on two recent cases, they highlight that while unreasonable refusal or non-engagement may lead to adverse costs consequences, refusing mediation is not automatically penalised where a party’s position is justified by the circumstances. The article emphasises the importance of assessing ADR options throughout a dispute and documenting the rationale for delaying or declining mediation, helping litigators protect their clients from unnecessary costs and adverse court rulings.

View the full article here.