Hetty Gleave writes on when to mediate and what can happen if one fails to do so in Art Resolve

  • April 01, 2019
  • By Hetty Gleave, Partner

When to mediate – the tipping point

It is often said that mediation is a more effective way of enabling the parties to settle their disputes outside the court process, thereby saving costs, the inevitable stress of litigation and preserving confidentiality in the process. If that is the case then why do people not take the opportunity to mediate at the first sign of a dispute and why do cases ever end up in court at all?

There can be various reasons why people turn to the court first. A decision to litigate may be tactical, i.e. a belief that the other party will be “fazed” by litigation or costs implications and just “give in”, or guided by emotional rather than strategic considerations. Parties may have a strong belief in the legal, and moral, merits of their case and simply feel that there is nothing to mediate.

What is clear is that the courts now encourage mediation at every step. It is written into the Civil Procedure Rules that mediation must be considered before proceedings are brought and at every stage in proceedings once issued. People who fail to mediate, or at least consider mediation if it is offered, do so at their peril. The courts are frequently making cost Orders against parties who have unreasonably received/failed to consider any form of alternative dispute resolution, even if they then go on to win the main action.

Proceedings cost money as documents need to be prepared and filed and there are strict time limits with penalties in default (some of which can be fatal). Parties also fail to factor in the “litigation risk” of their evidence or witnesses failing to measure up (or even show up), last minute evidence coming to light or the matter simply coming before a judge who is not as convinced as the parties are to the merits of their case. Anything can happen from the date of issuing proceedings to the date of a Final Hearing, by which time the costs to the applicant of withdrawing from proceedings, bearing in mind they will have to pay the defendant’s costs to the date of discontinuance if they do get cold feet, can often make it virtually impossible for one party to give up.

If a dispute is likely then it is always advisable to consider how a resolution can be achieved before the conflict escalates out of control. Often situational pressures can cause a dispute that could not be resolved by well-meaning attempts, to become hardened over time. What may have started as interests and opinions become fixed and turn from a disagreement into a stand point, from which it is difficult to move away. Testing a party’s resolve by issuing proceedings only to see if they will give in to pressure, is never a risk free strategy. Mediation will inevitably be encouraged by a Judge at some stage in the proceedings and by then there is usually more at stake to argue about as costs are an added consideration.

Parties already locked in litigation should consider that a negotiated outcome is always more flexible than a court imposed one, which can operate as a blunt instrument over which they have no control. It is often the case that the risks of full blown litigation only become tangible once a Judge starts making orders for disclosure and statements of costs consequences are a reality. There is nothing to lose by considering mediation at this stage, but everything to gain.

Anticipating potential disputes is a skill but knowing how to resolve the dispute before they reach court is an even greater skill. It may be that it is only when the parties are involved in proceedings that they begin to realise the attraction of settlement, but early discussion or negotiation, facilitated by a third party if possible, is rarely a waste of time. It enables emotional issues to be aired in private, rather than through a public court forum, and often clears the way for sensible commercial choices.

This article was originally published in Art Resolve and can be accessed here.

Related News

Feb 07, 2020
The British Art Market Federation (BAMF) publishes new guidance on anti-money laundering
Jan 10, 2020
Gregor Kleinknecht and Petra Warrington discuss new anti-money laundering rules for the art trade
Jan 09, 2020
Petra Warrington nominated to an officer role in the Art, Cultural Institutions and Heritage Law Committee of the IBA
Jan 02, 2020
Petra Warrington discusses loaning art at home and abroad in Antiques Trade Gazette
Nov 18, 2019
Petra Warrington comments on the Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive and art law in Antiques Trade Gazette
Nov 08, 2019
Hunters hosted a legal seminar for fine art auctioneers
Nov 06, 2019
Hunters is proud to sponsor the London Art Week 2019 Winter event
Sep 24, 2019
Partner Hetty Gleave is reappointed to the Treasure Valuation Committee
Sep 02, 2019
Gregor Kleinknecht comments on Timothy Sammons misleading clients over sales of works by artists in The Art Newspaper
Aug 29, 2019
Hetty Gleave discusses the largest coin hoard of the post-conquest period found near Somerset

© Hunters Law LLP 2020 | Privacy NoticeLegal & Regulatory | Cookies Policy | Complaints Procedure

Hunters Law LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (number 657218)