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.
Allen v Colman Coyle Llp [2007] ADR.L.R. 06/29
Failure to mediate : costs. Impact of potential costs claim on feasability of mediation. A failure to engage in mediation or to attempt a settlement can amount to a special circumstance within the meaning of s70(10) Solicitors Act 1974. Costs Judge. 29th June 2007.
by Master Simons, Crown Copyright

Brown (Tim) v Rice (Stephen). Patel (Smita) ADR Group (Intervener) [2007] ADR.L.R. 03/14
Without Prejudice : Were mediations proceedings admissible to determine whether or not a settlement offer had been made and accepted? Held : Yes - an established exception to the privilege rules. In the event, no valid offer had been made. The claim remained alive and was set down for trial accordingly. Chancery Division. 14th March 2007.
by Stuart Isaacs QC : Crown Copyright

Brunel University v Webster [2007] ADR.L.R. 05/22
Without prejudice : Waiver : Material involved in settlement process introduced by and referred to by both parties before the EAT. Held : Effective bilateral waiver. 22nd May 2007
by Longmore LJ; Smith LJ; Sir Paul Kennedy. Crown Copyright

Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Ltd [2007] ADR.L.R. 03/23
Costs : Mediation to be pursued late and out of sync with the pre-action protocol. Judgement here would clear the way and simplify matters for the mediation. Daejan Investments v Park West Club Ltd [2004] BLR 223, approach in which HHJ Wilcox came to the conclusion that it was appropriate to make it a condition of permission to amend in a case where the pre-action protocol had not been complied with, that the amending party should pay the other parties\' costs up to that stage applied. 23rd March 2007.
by Mr Justice Ramsey. Crown Copyright

Egan v Motor Services (Bath) Ltd [2007] ADR.L.R. 10/18
Failure by both parties to mediate deprecated. Purpose of issuing draft judgments is to allow parties to proof read & broker costs arrangements : The practice of asking the judge to revise a decision is to be discouraged except in the most exceptional of circimstances. CA on appeal from Bristol County Court (HHJ Rutherford DL. CA. 18th October 2007
by Ward LJ; Arden LJ; Smith LJ. Crown Copyright

Equitas Ltd & Anor. v Horace Holman & Company Ltd. [2007] ADR.L.R. 04/27
Costs : Protracted action by assignee of Lloyd\\\'s Syndicate arising out of a settlement agreement against a Broker for inaccurate record keeping. Ultimately it was established that a small sum due to Equitas due to faulty records. Bulk of claim had fallen away once certain records disclosed. Court considered that this could and should have been dealt with by mediation where the problem of records could have been solved. Mediation mooted by Equitas but not actively pursued and not taken into account in costs order. Commercial Court. 27th April 2007.
by Mr Justice Andrew Smith. Crown Copyright

Finster (Paul Sheridan) v Arriva London & Steven Booth [2007] ADR.L.R. 02/07
Mediation rejected : Quantum settlement : Costs. Personal injury claim established : Claimant rejected offer of mediation. Initially a payment in of ?10K was rejected, but then accepted post trial of entitlement pending quantum hearing together with standard costs. Initial claim was for ?1M+ for lost job opportunity. Job offer was verbal and no corroborating evidence provided to court. Claim exaggerated. 3 day trial excessive. Standard costs for 1 days trial only granted. Supreme Court Costs Office. 7th Feburary 2007
by Deputy Master Williams : Crown Copyright

Framlington Group Ltd v Barnetson [2007] ADR.L.R. 05/24
Without Prejudice : How proximate must unsuccessful negotiations in a dispute leading to litigation be to the start of litigation, to attract the without prejudice rule. The critical feature of proximity for this purpose is one of the subject matter of the dispute rather than how long before the threat, or start, of litigation it was aired in negotiations i.e. whether the parties contemplated or might reasonably have contemplated litigation if they could not agree. CA. 24th May 2007
by Auld LJ; Longmore LJ; Toulson LJ. Crown Copyright

Holloway v Chancery Mead Ltd [2007] ADR.L.R. 07/30
A building contract provided a range of options for dispute resolution ranging from an ADR settlement process through to arbitration. The home owner submitted the dispute to arbitration the builder sought to stay the arbitration pending the outcome of an ADR settlement process. Held : The ADR was an option not a prerequisite and in the circumstances there was an immediate right to pursue arbitration. TCC. 30th July 2007
by Mr Justice Ramsey.

Malmesbury v Strutt & Parker (a partnership) [2007] ADR.L.R. 05/11
Waiver of mediation privilege : costs of unreasonable behaviour of party submitting dispute to mediation of maintaining an unreasonable demand which led to failure of negotiations where sum offered by respondent ulimately not beaten in court. Queens Bench. 11th May 2007
by Mr Justice Jack : Crown Copyright

McGeough v Thomson Holidays Ltd. [2007] ADR.L.R. 12/20
\"Mediation is a valuable facility, which has a significant role to play in the administration of justice. It does not in my view assist the cause of mediation if parties are urged to mediate in a situation in which there is no real possibility that it will help. In this case both parties were advised by competent and experienced solicitors. The respondent had in his favour, following trial, a judgment wholly favourable to him, and one which in the event this court considers to be entirely sound. Of course, there may be room for negotiation in such a situation, the outcome of litigation, including litigation on appeal, never being free from hazard, but such negotiation could be conducted between legal advisers.\" CA. 20th December 2007
by Pill LJ; Keene LJ; Thomas LJ.

Palfrey v Wilson [2007] ADR.L.R. 01/15
Settlement versus mediation offer : Costs. Dispute about ownership of a wall. Defendant offered for wall to be designated a party wall. Rejected - counter offer of mediation not taken up. Claim ultimately failed and costs ordered on an indemnity basis upon rejection of the initial offer. Failed appeals both on ownership and on costs. Having made constructive offers there was no requirement to enter into mediation. CA. 15th February 2007.
by Tuckey LJ; Arden LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. Crown Copyright

Stocking v Montila [2007] ADR.L.R. 01/26
Enforcement : Settlement agreement. Rejected settlement offer : Costs. Partnership dispute. Settlement offer made without any terms of reference. At trial expert reports produced regarding respective shares in business and rent due for occupation of partnership property. Court held : the reports were needed not just for the trial but for dissolution of partnership. Rejection of a bare offer without explanation of how calculated was justifiable. No costs order made. Chancery. 26th January 2007
by Mr Justice Rimer : Crown Copyright

Trustees of Morden College v Mayrick [2007] ADR.L.R. 01/12
Enforcement : Settlement agreement : assertion of mistake : Held : Where facts known settlement agreement cannot be reopened on grounds of mistake - otherwise all compromise agreements including mediated settlements would be liable to futher litigation. 12th January 2007.
by Chadwick, Hallett LJJ and Lindsay J. Crown Copyright

UPS Supply Chain Solutions v. Glasgow Airport Ltd [2007] ADR.L.R. 12/19
Frustrated mediation - costs. Trial preparation and mediation well progressed when the claimant introduced a new claim for lost profits : once both parties had eventually fulfilled accountancy procedures in order to evaluate the claim the claim was dropped as being unrealistic. Held : Costs from the date of the amended claim recoverable by the other party. Outer House Court of Session. 19th December 2007
by Lord Glennie : Crown Copyright

Zambia v Meer Care & Desai (No. 2) [2007] ADR.L.R. 06/29
Failure to mediate : 5% cost penalty. Chancery. 29th June 2007
by Mr Justice Peter Smith : 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.