The litigation landscape has changed over the last decade, and although mediation is not technically compulsory, the court civil procedure rules and the judiciary strongly encourage parties to seek to settle their disputes through alternative means, such as mediation, at an early stage.
Mediation is a very effective means of resolving disputes: it has a success rate in reaching a binding settlement of around 75-80%. As such, we recommend exploring mediation because as well as saving money, it avoids the disruption of contested court proceedings, as well as potential damage to an organisation’s reputation. In fact, without trying mediation, you may subsequently be criticised by the judge should your case go to court.
We guide our clients and provide experienced and insightful representation throughout the process of mediation. As part of our deep understanding of the sectors that we serve, we know how damaging internal and external disputes can be in distracting our clients from their key purposes. We have helped our clients to devise solutions in seemingly impossible situations, and we use the strength and depth of our housing sector knowledge to achieve this. Mediation saves management time and money: it is a cost-effective and efficient means to resolve disputes.
We help clients facing serious disputes and manage them in a planned way from the outset, finding alternative and creative solutions to disputes. By using mediation we can help solve disputes such as:
We can also provide training in the correct procedures to implement to be best placed to manage problems when they arise. This helps keep your organisation on track and even allows it to benefit from the lessons that flow from managing disputes.
Outcomes we have achieved when representing our clients in mediation include:
Such freedoms will allow HAs greater flexibility over how they use their assets and, potentially, how they structure their businesses. Our expert panel gathered to discuss the possible opportunities the deregulatory measures offer, together with the likely hurdles. Read the outcome of their discussion here.
Andrew is a Partner in our construction and public procurement team operating within the local government, care and social housing sectors. He is a specialist in helping clients to manage construction
Impact of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Bresco Services Limited v Michael J Lonsdale [2020].
In the fourth part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks arising out of varying the terms of construction contracts.
Social housing providers will routinely have a number of construction projects underway at any one time. It is essential for client teams to understand and avoid key contract management pitfalls.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.
