Publication Type
Book Chapter
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
6-2025
Abstract
Access to civil justice, a concept integral to the rule of law, has been an enduring concern in many countries. One prominent strategy to enhance access to civil justice entails the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods prior to court adjudication. In this regard, efforts to embed ADR within the court system have intensified in both England and Wales and Singapore. In Singapore, the parties have a duty to consider ADR prior to and during civil proceedings. More significantly, the courts have been empowered to order parties to attempt ADR. In a similar vein, the English Court of Appeal in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council made a landmark ruling that the courts have the power to lawfully stay proceedings or order parties to engage in ADR. Two decades ago, this author discussed whether mandatory mediation in a court-connected programme was an oxymoron because of potential inconsistency with the voluntary nature of mediation. This chapter revisits the article to take into account recent ADR developments and to focus on ADR instead of mediation. The chapter critically appraises the rationale for mandating, instead of encouraging, the use of ADR. It then sets out the key design features to be considered when designing a mandatory ADR mechanism. Next, it discusses the challenges arising from mandatory ADR that impinge on access to justice, with reference to the Singapore civil justice reforms as a case study. Drawing the preceding sections together, it will be argued that mandatory ADR is not a simple panacea to enhance access to civil justice. A successful mandatory ADR policy requires clarity of the desired connection between ADR and access to justice, thoughtful design of the mandatory ADR mechanism to be consistent with these objectives, guidance for the courts to determine when to order the use of ADR and measures to ensure cost-effective access to high quality ADR services.
Keywords
Mandatory ADR, alternative dispute resolution, access to justice
Discipline
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
Research Areas
Dispute Resolution
Publication
Sustaining access to justice in Europe: New avenues for costs and funding
Editor
Xandra Kramer, Masood Ahmed, Adriana Dori, María Carlota Ucín
First Page
257
Last Page
279
ISBN
9781509981670
Publisher
Hart Publishing
City or Country
UK
Embargo Period
1-2026
Citation
Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON.
Revisiting “mandatory mediation: An oxymoron?” advancing access to civil justice through mandatory ADR. (2025). Sustaining access to justice in Europe: New avenues for costs and funding. 257-279.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4656
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/sustaining-access-to-justice-9781509981670/