UK: No "General Presumption" in Favour of ADR

Last Updated: 17 August 2004

The debate which ensued following the well-publicised case of Dunnett v Railtrack (2002) has been recently considered by the Court of Appeal in the two linked cases of Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust and Steel v Joy and Halliday, in which judgment was given on 11 May 2004. The main issue in both appeals was when the court should consider imposing a costs sanction against a successful litigant on the ground that he has refused to take part in mediation.

In Dunnett v Railtrack a successful litigant was for the first time deprived of costs for refusing to mediate. Lord Justice Brooke (who presided over Dunnett) granted leave to appeal on this point in both Halsey and Steel and in Halsey (the lead case) invited mediation providers to intervene, giving the Court of Appeal the opportunity to revisit this issue and give constructive guidance.

Whilst these two cases are in the personal injury arena, the ramifications of the decisions and guidance from the Court of Appeal are relevant to all involved in litigation.


Halsey was a clinical negligence case brought by Mrs Halsey over the death of her husband. Steel was a case concerning apportionment between two different defendants where the claimant had been injured as a result of two successive torts, and liability for both accidents had been admitted.

The claimant in Halsey and the first defendant in Steel had made repeated offers to the defendant and second defendant respectively to mediate, backed up by the threat of seeking costs sanctions for a refusal. The offers were declined.

In Halsey, the main reasons given for the refusal to participate in mediation were that: liability was in dispute and no offers to settle would be made; it was disproportionate to hold a mediation given the value of the claim; and the claimant’s offers to mediate were perceived to be tactical to extract an economic settlement from the defendant (the claimant’s solicitors being on a conditional fee agreement with a 100% success uplift but not backed by an insurance policy).

In Steel the two defendants had fundamental differences on interpretation of the law on apportionment, which was the subject of Part 20 contribution proceedings brought by the first defendant against the second defendant.

The claimant in Halsey and the first defendant in Steel were unsuccessful at trial. Both unsuccessful parties submitted to the Court that a costs sanction should be imposed on the successful party for their refusal to mediate.

After lengthy submissions on costs, the trial judges held that on the facts of each case there was no reason to make any costs sanction for the refusals to mediate and that the successful parties were entitled to all their costs in the usual way.

Both unsuccessful parties appealed against the costs orders, quoting Dunnett.


The cases attracted much interest from the industry and their implications were widely debated, resulting in several intervening parties (the ADR Group, The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution, the Civil Mediation Council and the Law Society) making submissions.


The Court of Appeal recognised that the most a court could do is to encourage ADR and to explore any reasons for resistance to it, for fear of breaching Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights (right of access to a court). If a party remains opposed to ADR despite robust encouragement from the court, this would be a relevant factor to be taken into account at the costs stage.

The Court of Appeal held that whilst a successful party could be deprived of some or all of his costs on the ground that he has refused to participate in ADR, such an order is an exception to the rule that costs should follow the event. The court held that the burden is on the unsuccessful party to show why there should be a departure from that general rule, the fundamental principle being that such a departure is not justified unless it is shown that the successful party acted unreasonably in refusing to agree to ADR.

The Court of Appeal recognised that there are many advantages to ADR over and above the court process, but there are also disadvantages and there should be no "general presumption" in favour of ADR.

In listing relevant factors in determining reasonableness the court held that no single factor will be decisive and the list is not exhaustive. The factors include: the nature of the dispute; the merits of the case; the extent to which other settlement methods had been attempted; whether the costs of ADR would be disproportionately high to the overall value of the claim; whether ADR would delay the trial of the action; and whether ADR had a reasonable prospect of success.

Their Lordships felt that an important factor to be considered was the merits of the case, to prevent the use (in hopeless cases) of tactical offers to mediate, with the threat of seeking costs sanctions. Given the debate on Dunnett and many parties feeling that they should attend mediations for fear of adverse costs orders if they refuse, this is a crucial part of the Judgment.

Their Lordships said: "Large organisations, especially public bodies, are vulnerable to pressure from claimants who, having weak cases, invite mediation as a tactical ploy. They calculate that such a defendant may at least make a nuisance-value offer to buy off the cost of a mediation and the risk of being penalised in costs for refusing mediation even if ultimately successful. Courts should be particularly astute to this danger".

On the facts of each case, the appeals in both Halsey and Steel were dismissed. 

In Halsey the court held that the claimant came nowhere near to showing that the defendant acted unreasonably in refusing mediation. The court upheld the trial judge’s view that the claimant’s solicitors’ offers of mediation were tactical to extract a monetary settlement and, hence, be entitled to their costs with a 100% uplift. The court also agreed with the defendant that the costs of a mediation would have been disproportionately high for the overall value of the claim.

In Steel the nature of the dispute was considered important. The claim against the second defendant raised a question of law and therefore the second defendant did not act unreasonably in wanting to have that dispute resolved by the court.


No doubt the decisions in Halsey and Steel will be the subject of much debate over the coming months but, at last, the Court of Appeal appears to have taken a sensible approach on the issue of whether, and when, to apply costs sanctions to a successful party who has refused to participate in ADR.

However, given the uncertainties surrounding what a court would regard as an unreasonable refusal of ADR, solicitors must take great care in advising clients on this issue.

Barlow Lyde & Gilbert acted for the respondent (Milton Keynes General NHS Trust) in the Halsey appeal. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions