FLK1 · SQE1 module
Dispute Resolution
Dispute Resolution tests civil litigation mechanics: pre-action conduct, statements of case, disclosure, and the court’s active case management under the Civil Procedure Rules.
A recurring pattern asks what happens when a party unreasonably refuses to engage with alternative dispute resolution, since this feeds directly into costs consequences.
What this module covers
- The overriding objective and case management powers
- Pre-action protocols and starting proceedings
- Alternative dispute resolution and its interaction with costs
- Disclosure, evidence and enforcement of judgments
380+ practice questions in this subject.
A real question from this module
Try it before you decide
A claimant proposes mediation early in proceedings. The defendant declines, believing the claim to be hopeless and wanting a quick summary judgment instead, but does not otherwise explain the refusal to the claimant or the court. The defendant wins at trial. In deciding whether to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event, which of the following will the court consider?
- AWhether the defendant’s belief that the claim was hopeless was objectively reasonable on the facts known at the time
- BWhether the claimant would have accepted a lower settlement figure, had mediation gone ahead as proposed at the time
- CWhether the defendant’s own solicitors had personally recommended mediation before the refusal took place at all
- DWhether the trial judge personally considers mediation a more efficient process than litigation in general
- EWhether the claimant issued proceedings before or after first proposing mediation to the defendant informally
Show the answer and why
Answer: A. Whether an outright refusal to engage in mediation was unreasonable is assessed against the circumstances known at the time of the refusal, including whether the refusing party’s belief in the strength of its case was objectively reasonable, not simply genuinely held. A party’s own solicitors’ recommendations, a judge’s personal enthusiasm for mediation, and the sequence in which proceedings were issued are not, on their own, the test the court applies to the refusal itself.
Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576, CPR r.44.2.