Report comment

Anon @ 17.46: No: most (or even all) solicitors are not opposed to compromise when it is sensible to do so, taking into account the client's wishes, the risk of losing, costs, etc. Clients may be more obdurate, for all sorts of reasons (I have acted for clients in iffy matters where the political culture in the client company meant no-one would advocate surrender or compromise: safer for the personnel concerned to fight in court/arbitration and lose).

I have also participated in ADR processes which, while outwardly looked like a good idea, in fact considerably strained one party's resources and meant failing to settle in ADR meant that party didn't have the resources to continue the litigation - in essence, the ADR requirement bullied a less than ideal settlement.

Overall, ADR is a good thing and to be encouraged, but it should NOT be mandatory. It's adding another layer of cost and in smaller and non commercial cases that can have an unjust effect.