Skip to content

9084 · 1.2.2

Alternative methods of dispute resolution — practice questions

Practice and worked examples for 9084 Alternative methods of dispute resolution. Short previews only — attempt the full question in MarkScheme against the official scheme.

Worked example 1

Two companies dispute a £200,000 supply contract. One wants confidentiality and a quick resolution; the other insists on a binding outcome without going to court. Advise on suitable ADR methods and evaluate whether a court could penalise refusal to mediate. [10 marks]

Show solution outline

Issue: Which ADR method fits, and consequences of refusing mediation.

Negotiation: Cheapest first step — parties' solicitors can exchange without prejudice offers. Non-binding unless agreement reached.

Mediation: Suitable for confidentiality and relationship preservation. Mediator facilitates but does not decide. Outcome only binding if parties sign settlement agreement.

Arbitration: Best where parties want a binding, private decision without public court process. Arbitrator's award enforceable as contract; appeal grounds narrow (s69 Arbitration Act 1996).

Court penalties: Under Halsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust, courts may impose adverse costs orders if a party unreasonably refuses ADR. Factors: nature of dispute, merits, costs of ADR vs trial, delay, and whether ADR had reasonable prospect of success.

Conclusion: Start with negotiation; if deadlock, arbitration meets both parties' needs for a binding and confidential outcome. Unreasonable refusal of mediation risks costs sanctions even if the refusing party wins at trial.

Exam tip: Match method to party priorities — binding vs non-binding, cost, speed, confidentiality.

Worked example 2

A small software company, 'Innovate Ltd', is in a dispute with a client, 'Corp PLC', over an unpaid invoice of £80,000 for a bespoke software module. Innovate Ltd's solicitor estimates that taking the case to the High Court would involve the following costs: Solicitor's fees (100 hours at £300/hr), Barrister's fees (£10,000), and court fees of £4,000. The process would take approximately 15 months. Alternatively, they could attempt a one-day mediation. The mediator's fee is £4,000 (to be split equally), and solicitor's fees for preparation and attendance would be 12 hours. Calculate the total estimated cost for each option and advise on the financial implications.

Show solution outline

Objective: To compare the estimated costs of litigation versus mediation for an £80,000 commercial dispute.

Step 1: Calculate the Total Estimated Cost of Litigation

  • Solicitor's Fees: This is the hourly rate multiplied by the estimated number of hours. 100 hours×£300/hour=£30,000100 \text{ hours} \times £300/\text{hour} = £30,000
  • Barrister's Fees: Given as a fixed sum. £10,000£10,000
  • Court Fees: Given as a fixed sum. £4,000£4,000
  • Total Litigation Cost: Sum of all litigation-related costs. £30,000+£10,000+£4,000=£44,000£30,000 + £10,000 + £4,000 = £44,000

Step 2: Calculate the Total Estimated Cost of Mediation

  • Innovate Ltd's share of Mediator's Fee: The total fee is split equally between the two parties. £4,000÷2=£2,000£4,000 \div 2 = £2,000
  • Solicitor's Fees for Mediation: This is the hourly rate for the reduced time commitment. 12 hours×£300/hour=£3,60012 \text{ hours} \times £300/\text{hour} = £3,600
  • Total Mediation Cost for Innovate Ltd: Sum of the party's share of the mediator's fee and their own legal costs. £2,000+£3,600=£5,600£2,000 + £3,600 = £5,600

Step 3: Conclusion and Advice

  • Litigation Cost: £44,000 (taking 15 months)
  • Mediation Cost: £5,600 (taking 1 day)

Financial Implication: The estimated cost of litigation (£44,000) represents 55% of the total claim value (£80,000). Even if Innovate Ltd wins, they may not recover all their legal costs. The cost of mediation (£5,600) is significantly lower, representing only 7% of the claim value. There is a clear and substantial financial incentive to attempt mediation. It offers a potential saving of £38,400 in legal costs and resolves the matter over a year sooner, which is critical for a small company's cash flow.