Contracts of hugely varying complexity between companies for the supply of goods or services are part of everyday life. Procurement departments and lawyers spend time and money trying to ensure that every "t" is crossed and every "i" dotted. Why is it then that the Courts are being asked to deal with ever greater amounts of litigation?
No matter how tight the wording, different interpretations often emerge and this has led much of the contracting fraternity to include dispute resolution clauses as part of the contract. Frequently the methodology suggested is independent and impartial mediation.

The benefits of contract mediation to the parties not only include a quicker and less expensive way forward but also the preservation of a hard won relationship and the ability to continue to do business.

Litigation is expensive, time consuming, protracted and the outcomes reached are invariably unsatisfactory to at least one of the parties.

Interestingly the Courts are taking a robust view of the benefits of mediation and are increasingly saying that if in their view a dispute could have been mediated successfully but both or either of the parties was unwilling to participate, then the successful party at litigation may not be awarded costs. Lord Justice Dyson has said 'all members of the legal profession should routinely consider with their clients whether their disputes are suitable for dispute resolution'.

Cornelius Parker has considerable experience in facilitating and managing successful negotiations in contractual disputes.

Please click here for case summary of Commercial settlement.