Home   About us   About ADR   NADR Services   Publications
  Forms   Members   Forums   Links   NMA
• Adjudication
• Adjudication Federal Australia
• Adjudication Law Reports
• Adjudication Law Reports 1999
• Adjudication Law Reports 2000
• Adjudication Law Reports 2001
• Adjudication Law Reports 2002
• Adjudication Law Reports 2003
• Adjudication Law Reports 2004
• Adjudication Law Reports 2005
• Adjudication Law Reports 2006
• Adjudication Law Reports 2007
• Adjudication Law Reports 2008
• Adjudication Law Reports Index
• Adjudication New South Wales
• Adjudication New Zealand
• Adjudication Northern Territory
• Adjudication Queensland
• Adjudication Singapore
• Adjudication South Australia
• Adjudication Tasmania
• Adjudication Victoria
• Adjudication Western Australia
• ADR Law Reports
• ADR Law Reports 1997
• ADR Law Reports 1998
• ADR Law Reports 1999
• ADR Law Reports 2000
• ADR Law Reports 2001
• ADR Law Reports 2002
• ADR Law Reports 2003
• ADR Law Reports 2004
• ADR Law Reports 2005
• ADR Law Reports 2006
• ADR Law Reports 2007
• ADR Law Reports 2008
• ADR Law Reports Index
• Alernative Dispute Resolution
• Arbitration
• Arbitration Law Reports 1996
• Arbitration Law Reports 1997
• Arbitration Law Reports 1998
• Arbitration Law Reports 1999
• Arbitration Law Reports 2000
• Arbitration Law Reports 2001
• Arbitration Law Reports 2002
• Arbitration Law Reports 2003
• Arbitration Law Reports 2004
• Arbitration Law Reports 2005
• Arbitration Law Reports 2006
• Arbitration Law Reports 2007
• Arbitration Law Reports 2008
• Arbitration Law Reports Index
• Arbitration Older Reports
• Banking
• Commercial Law Reports 1997
• Commercial Law Reports 1998
• Commercial Law Reports 1999
• Commercial Law Reports 2000
• Commercial Law Reports 2001
• Commercial Law Reports 2002
• Commercial Law Reports 2003
• Commercial Law Reports 2004
• Commercial Law Reports 2005
• Commercial Law Reports 2006
• Commercial Law Reports 2007
• Commercial Law Reports 2008
• Commercial Law Reports Index
• Conflicts of Law
• Constitution Law Reports
• Constitutional Law
• Construction
• Construction Law Reports
• Construction Law Reports 2000
• Construction Law Reports 2001
• Construction Law Reports 2002
• Construction Law Reports 2003
• Construction Law Reports 2004
• Construction Law Reports 2005
• Construction Law Reports 2006
• Construction Law Reports 2007
• Construction Law Reports 2008
• Construction Law Reports Index
• Dispute Review Boards
• Education
• Employment
• Intellectual Property
• Legal Research
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Mediation
• Medical
• Private International Law
• Public International Law
• Public Law
• Shipping & Trade
• Sports Law
• Who's Who



View a printer friendly version of this page.
Abballe (Trading As G.F.A) v. Alstom UK Ltd [2000] ADR.L.R. 03/24
Good faith agreements and agreements to agree. TCC. 24th March 2000,
by His Honour Judge Humphrey Lloyd : Crown Copyright

Alan Clive Gold v Mincoff Science & Gold (A Firm) [2000] ADR.L.R. 12/21
Impact of ADR on Limitation of Action : s14A Limitation Act action ? impact of ADR on right to limitation ? solicitor negligently failed to advise on impact of partnership agreement on joint liability for previously incurred debts of another partner. Ch.Div. 21st December 2000
by His Honour Judge Neuberger. : Crown Copyright

Amber v Stacey [2000] ADR.L.R. 11/15
Defendant penalised for making a written offer as opposed to a CPR 36.3 payment in : A subsequent payment in was beaten in court (but not the writen offer). Court stated 36.3 offer is more secure. Defendant ordered to pay half the costs - claimant had been precipitate and unreasonable. CA. 15th November 2000.
by Simon Brown LJ, Sir Anthony Evans. Crown Copyright

Barclays Plc v Villiers [2000] ADR.L.R. 01/25
Interpretation of settlement : Settlement agreement contained a Med/Arb Clause. The scope of the agreement referred to court for interpretation : Whilst this concerned an application for a stay to arbitration the real issue between the parties was whether or not one party had been bound to make certain payments and thus the other was entitled to recover on the settlement indemnity. The answer to both was YES. Comm. Div. High Court. 25th January 2000.
by The Honourable Mr JusticeLangley : Crown Copyright.

Carillion Construction Ltd v Felix (UK) Ltd [2000] ADR.L.R. 11/06
Coercion - duress - undue influence : Compromise agreement induced by threat of non supply of material in relation to work in progress. Compromise set aside. TCC. 6th November 2000.
by His Honour Judge Dyson. : Crown Copyright

David Leslie Bates v Microstar Ltd [2000] ADR.L.R. 07/04
ADR : Summary judgement. Successful appeal against a summary judgement : Trial ordered but stayed pending ADR ? aggressive correspondence by solicitor criticised by the court. C.A. 4th July 2000.
by Vice Chancellor Sir Richard Scott : Crown Copyright

Dermot Gerard Richard Walsh v Andre Martin Misseldine [2000] ADR.L.R. 02/29
Medical claims suitable for ADR : Court considered the grounds for striking out under both the old regime and under the CPR. Makes a brief reference to mediation and overriding objectives. 29th February 2000.
by Lord Justices Stuart-Smith & Brooke : Crown Copyright

Firle Investments Ltd v. Datapoint International Ltd [2000] ADR.L.R. 05/08
Costs : Settlement offer : Claimant rejected offers and went on to achieve a victory by a slim margin. Costs awarded at 33% overall and at 15% after the final offer. TCC. 8th May 2000.
by Colin Reese QC. Crown Copyright

Gnitrow Ltd v Cape plc [2000] ADR.L.R. 06/30
Action for contribution to a settlement agreement by a co-contractor. Without prejudice negotiations led to settlement terms by insurance carriers of asbestosis claims. The applicant sought disclosure of the terms to establish the extent of his liability. Disclosure ordered. CA. 30th June 2000.
by Pill LJ, Sir Murray Stuart-Smith. Crown Copyright

Lindner Ceilings Floors Partitions Plc v How Engineering Services Ltd [2000] ADR.L.R. 11/28
A sealed offer to be effective as to a costs award does not have to include costs : merely a clear indication as to whether or not costs are included. TCC. 28th November 2000
by His Honour Judge Richard Seymour : Crown Copyright

Mensah v Islington Council [2000] ADR.L.R. 12/01
Mediation : non legal outcomes : appology. Whilst the court, in rejecting an application to appeal noted that this case was not suitable for mediation, the primary remedy, viz an appology was not one open to the court, whereas that is something frequently used as a key to a settlement. CA. 1st December 2000.
by Arden LJ; Peter Gibson LJ. : Crown Copyright

MT v DT [2000] ADR.L.R. 11/10
Admissibility of disclosures during mediation of family dispute denied. Inner House Court of Session. 10th November 2000.
by Lord President; Lords Milligan, Nimmo Smith, Bonomy, Allanbridge. Crown Copyright

Paul Thomas Construction Ltd v Damian Hyland & Jackie Power [2000] ADR.L.R. 03/08
Indemnity costs less ADR cost : Cost hearing on failed s24/25 CPR applications by a domestic house builders who provided no final account and refused to wait for the defendant?s valuation report.TCC. 8th March 2000.
by His Hon Judge Wilcox : Crown Copyright

Re Anglo American Insurance Company Ltd (No1) [2000] ADR.L.R. 04/12
"Without prejudice" correspondence : Admissibility. Ch.Div. 12th April 2000.
by His Honour Judge Neuberger. Crown Copyright

Re Anglo American Insurance Company Ltd (No2) [2000] ADR.L.R. 11/08
Court held that the content of "Without prejudice" correspondence should not be disclosed in court. NB : Nonetheless the correspondence facilitates the formulations of questions for cross examination. Ch.Div. 8th November 2000.
by His Honour Judge Neuberger. Crown Copyright

Rickards v Jones [2000]ADR.L.R. 10/13
Stay of proceedings pending ADR : The house purchaser claimant?s defendant solicitor failed to ensure NHBC cover for a property. The court ordered three party ADR involving NHBC & Solicitor. CA. 13th October 2000
by Mance LJ; Mrs Justice Smith : Crown Copyright

Somatra Ltd v Sinclair Roche & Temperley [2000] ADR.L.R. 07/26
Privilege : Without prejudice : Justice requires that where one party discloses without prejudice material to the court, the other party can also rely on that material in that and other trials. C.A. 26th July 2000
by Lord Justices Waller & Clarke : Crown Copyright

W H Smith Limited v Peter Colman (t/a Cherished Domains) [2000] ADR.L.R. 03/20
Privilege : Without prejudice : Burden of proof -to pierce the veil - unambiguous impropriety - not satisfied by an implausible case. CA. 20th March 2000.
by Beldam LJ, Robert Walker LJ. : Crown Copyright

Our publications are provided in PDF format, in order to view them you will need Adobe's free Acrobat reader. Acrobat reader can be downloaded from Adobe by following the link to your left.

Top of page

    Copyright © NADR 2000, all rights reserved.