Courts can compel parties to use Alternative Dispute Resolution
Francesca Muscutt and Millie Bailey of DAC Beachcroft look at the landmark decision, James Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, where the Court of Appeal has ruled that the courts can stay proceedings and order parties to engage in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), even where one or both parties have expressed an unwillingness to engage in the process.
The benefits of ADR have long been recognised. It is an efficient mechanism for resolving disputes quickly, privately and usually far more cheaply than taking a case to trial. The Pre-action Protocol for Professional Negligence (which covers claims against accountants and auditors) requires the parties to consider ADR before commencing court proceedings. The Court of Appeal decision in Churchill goes further by underscoring the importance of ADR even once proceedings are underway. The courts have the power to stay the proceedings and compel the parties to engage in ADR and there is an expectation this power will be exercised.