Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 11 SEPTEMBER 2015

The Dangers Of Refusing ADR

The courts have long been moving to encourage parties to disputes to seek to resolve those disputes via alternative methods.

United KingdomReal Estate and Construction

The courts have long been moving to encourage parties to disputes to seek to resolve those disputes via alternative methods. The court's overriding objective is for 'the court to deal with cases justly and at propor-tionate cost' (according to Pt 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, or CPR). Parties to a dispute are under a duty to help the court to further the overriding objective, and this is commonly interpreted by the courts to mean that parties to litigation should seek to find a resolution through alternative dispute resolution wherever possible.

Case law has developed since the CPR was introduced which shows that the court will be willing to impose costs sanctions on parties who do not agree to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and are none the less successful in their claims. Claimants will often be denied full recovery of their costs of bringing an action if they continued with the litigation in spite of a defendant's offer to seek to resolve the dispute.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from