The New ADR Landscape — and Why Dispute Neutral Is a Strong Fit

What the courts are now looking for

The October 2024 CPR changes confirm the power of courts in England and Wales to compel parties to engage in out-of-court ADR where it is proportionate and does not undermine the parties' right to a judicial hearing. When exercising its discretion as to costs, the court must have regard to whether a party failed to comply with an order for ADR or unreasonably failed to engage in ADR.

The judicial decisions in Churchill, Northamber, and other key cases signal an increasing expectation for parties to engage meaningfully with ADR, reinforcing a broader cultural shift toward collaborative dispute resolution.

What courts are looking for is not token engagement. They want parties to genuinely consider whether a non-court route can resolve the dispute — and to engage with it properly if it can. A binding neutral decision process, where both parties submit documents and written cases and an independent lawyer issues a binding determination, is a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute other than by a full court process, which is likely to be looked on favourably on costs.

Why a binding neutral decision is different from mediation

Not all ADR works the same way in practice.

Mediation is a facilitated negotiation. The mediator has no decision-making power. If the parties do not reach agreement, the dispute is unresolved and litigation continues. For commercial disputes where the parties are entrenched or the issues are genuinely contested, mediation may not produce a result.

A binding neutral decision process is fundamentally different. Both parties agree in advance to be bound by the neutral's decision. The neutral reviews the contract, the documents, and the written submissions from both sides — and issues a determination. The dispute is resolved. There is no risk of the process ending without an outcome.

For costs purposes, genuinely engaging in a binding neutral decision process before proceedings escalate shows that both parties have taken the courts' expectation seriously and committed to a process capable of producing a definitive outcome. Whether any particular conduct is reasonable still depends on the facts.

How Dispute Neutral fits the current landscape

Dispute Neutral is a private neutral decision service, with fees banded by the amount in dispute, for commercial disputes up to £150,000 in England and Wales and Northern Ireland. It covers unpaid invoices, trade debts and professional fees. Dispute Neutral decides disputes between businesses only: companies, partnerships and sole traders acting in the course of business. It does not currently accept disputes involving consumers.

Both parties agree to appoint an independent neutral: an independent lawyer with at least 15 years' practical experience, acting as an expert, not an arbitrator. The neutral reviews the documents and written submissions from both sides. There is no hearing. Neither party needs a solicitor. A binding decision is issued within 10 business days of the matter being ready.

Several features make this a strong fit for the current ADR environment:

• It is genuinely binding. Both parties commit to the outcome in advance. This is not a process that might not resolve anything — it produces a definitive determination. Expert determination is a recognised form of ADR.
• It is proportionate to the dispute. Disputes up to £150,000 often sit in what we call the sub-legal band: the range below the tipping point at which it becomes commercially viable to instruct solicitors and use traditional court processes, where costs can be incurred that may never be recovered. Dispute Neutral's fees are banded by the amount in dispute, from £650 + VAT for disputes up to £4,000 to £1,500 + VAT for disputes from £25,001 to £150,000.
• It is fast. A binding decision within 10 business days of the matter being ready means the dispute is decided in weeks. By comparison, Ministry of Justice figures (Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly, April to June 2026) show a median of 41.0 weeks from issue to trial for small claims, and 55.9 weeks for fast, intermediate and multi-track claims.
• It is private. There is no public hearing, and the papers are seen only by the parties and the neutral. If a decision is not followed, enforcing it may involve the court. For businesses where reputation and confidentiality matter, this is a significant practical advantage over court proceedings at any level.
• It can be agreed in advance. Businesses that include a Dispute Neutral clause in their standard contracts ensure that if a dispute arises, both parties have already agreed to a private, binding resolution process. Draft clauses are available in the Include us section of the site.

The direction of travel is clear

The DMCC Act signals a fundamental recognition that ADR is not an afterthought — it is a cornerstone of a fair, modern commercial economy. By bringing ADR under consistent regulation, the government is sending a clear message: parties deserve redress that is quick, affordable, and trustworthy.

For commercial disputes between businesses, the CPR changes have already moved in the same direction. Courts are actively managing cases toward ADR. Costs sanctions for unreasonable refusal are being applied. The expectation that parties explore non-court routes is embedded in the rules and reinforced by judicial decisions.

Dispute Neutral was built for exactly this environment — a proportionate, private, binding route to resolution for commercial disputes where the cost and delay of court is disproportionate to the amount at stake, and where both parties benefit from a faster, cheaper, and more certain outcome.

Does Dispute Neutral need to be accredited under the DMCC Act ADR regulations?

No. The DMCC Act ADR regulations that came into force on 6 April 2026 apply to ADR providers handling consumer contract disputes: disputes between a business and a consumer. Dispute Neutral decides disputes between businesses only: companies, partnerships and sole traders acting in the course of business. It does not currently accept disputes involving consumers. The service is a private, contract-based neutral decision process agreed between businesses.

If both parties have agreed to Dispute Neutral, does that satisfy the court's expectation around ADR engagement?

Generally, yes. Genuinely engaging in a binding neutral decision process, where both parties have committed in advance to be bound by the outcome, is a real attempt to resolve the dispute other than by a full court process, which is likely to be looked on favourably on costs. Whether any particular conduct is reasonable depends on the facts, and if a court has ordered a specific form of ADR, you should comply with that order.

Is expert determination the same as a binding neutral decision?

Expert determination and binding neutral decision are closely related: both involve an independent third party making a binding determination based on documents and submissions, without a hearing. The courts have recognised expert determination as a legitimate form of ADR. The Dispute Neutral process works on similar contractual principles and produces a binding determination. It is not a court judgment. If the decision is not followed, the right next step depends on the matter. Because it is a binding decision by an independent neutral, it should cut out much of the time and court process: it may be possible to apply straight to court for summary judgment, or to serve a statutory demand where appropriate, or the decision may simply fast-track the resolution.

What if one party proposes Dispute Neutral and the other refuses?

Both parties must agree before Dispute Neutral can decide a dispute, so if the other side refuses, the process cannot go ahead and other routes, including court, remain open. Courts in England and Wales must consider unreasonable failure to engage in ADR when deciding costs, and an attempt to resolve a dispute other than by a full court process is likely to be looked on favourably. But refusing Dispute Neutral in particular does not of itself lead to a costs penalty: whether any refusal is unreasonable depends on the facts. It helps to make your proposal in writing, explain why it is proportionate, invite the other side to suggest another form of ADR if they prefer, and keep a record of the replies.

Ready to engage with ADR on your terms?

Whether you are approaching a dispute as the party bringing a claim or on the receiving end, if both parties agree, Dispute Neutral offers a binding, proportionate and private route to resolution, consistent with what courts now expect and usually much faster than litigation.

Private • Fixed-fee • Binding decision in 10 business days once the matter is ready