z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Mandatory Mediation and the Rule of Law
Author(s) -
Michael Bartlet
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
amicus curiae
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2048-481X
pISSN - 1461-2097
DOI - 10.14296/ac.v1i1.5066
Subject(s) - mediation , scrutiny , law , political science , rule of law , due process , law and economics , economic justice , lawyer supported mediation , alternative dispute resolution , sociology , public law , private law , online dispute resolution , politics
This article evaluates mediation practice against the core principles that Thomas Bingham identifies as constituting the rule of law. It identifies three forms of compulsion and discusses these in the light of Thomas Bingham’s eight principles. The article examines how voluntary mediation may increase access to justice, a significant component of the rule of law, but an element of compulsion, in its strict sense, impedes the constitutional right of access to the courts and stifles the development of precedent. To comply with the rule of law, in its more substantive version, any instruction that parties attempt to settle via mediation needs to be subject to judicial scrutiny, must ensure that the cost of mediation is not disproportionate, that there is a genuine willingness of the parties to engage in the process with good faith, and that it involves no greater structural inequalities than in litigation.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here