Alternative Dispute Resolution Timing

Alternative Dispute Resolution Timing in relation to the Technology and Construction Court

[rtbs name=”technology-and-construction-court”]Alternative Dispute Resolution may be appropriate before the proceedings have begun or at any subsequent stage. However the later Alternative Dispute Resolution takes place, the more the costs which will have been incurred, often unnecessarily. The timing of Alternative Dispute Resolution needs careful consideration. The Technology and Construction Court Pre-Action Protocol (Section 2 above) itself provides for a type of Alternative Dispute Resolution, because it requires there to be at least one face-to-face meeting between the parties before the commencement of proceedings. At this meeting, there should be sufficient time to discuss and resolve the dispute. As a result of this procedure having taken place, the Technology and Construction Court will not necessarily grant a stay of proceedings upon demand and it will always need to be satisfied that an adjournment is actually necessary to enable Alternative Dispute Resolution to take place. However, at the first case management conference, the Technology and Construction Court will want to be addressed on the parties’ views as to the likely efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution, the appropriate timing of Alternative Dispute Resolution, and the advantages and disadvantages of a short stay of proceedings to allow Alternative Dispute Resolution to take place. Having considered the representations of the parties, the Technology and Construction Court may order a short stay to facilitate Alternative Dispute Resolution at that stage. Alternatively, the Technology and Construction Court may simply encourage the parties to seek Alternative Dispute Resolution and allow for it to occur within the timetable for the resolution of the proceedings set down by the court. At any stage after the first case management conference and prior to the commencement of the trial, the court, will, either on its own initiative or if requested to do so by one or both of the parties, consider afresh the likely efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution and whether or not a short stay of the proceedings should be granted, in order to facilitate Alternative Dispute Resolution.