header-logo header-logo

17 March 2021 / Jennifer Egsgard
Issue: 7925 / Categories: Features , Profession , Mediation , International justice , ADR
printer mail-detail

Should mediation be mandatory?

42839
Mandatory mediation: an impossible contradiction? Not in Ontario, Canada. Jennifer Egsgard reports.
  • Mandatory mediation in Ontario: how it works.
  • Evaluation of Ontario’s Mandatory Mediation Program.
  • Current lawyer views on Ontario Mandatory Mediation Program.
  • Increase in virtual mediations with COVID-19.

Should mediation ever be mandatory? While a subject of debate in the UK, nearly 20 years ago Ontario rule-makers answered ‘yes’ to this question. Since then, in three major cities mediation has been required in most civil litigation. Mandatory mediation in Ontario was shown to decrease time to settle cases, decrease cost to litigants, and increase satisfaction among lawyers and parties, among other benefits. Recent surveys of Ontario lawyers indicate that the vast majority of respondents would like mandatory mediation to be geographically expanded, showing satisfaction with the program. In September 2020, the Ontario Bar Association and other Ontario lawyer groups made formal recommendations to the Attorney General of Ontario that mandatory mediation be expanded geographically, and these recommendations are currently being considered by the government. Given the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll