The civil courts (County Court and High Court), the civil claims process and track allocation, and the alternative dispute resolution methods of negotiation, mediation, conciliation and arbitration.

What this dot point is asking

OCR Component 1 Section A requires you to know how a civil dispute (a claim in contract or tort between private parties) can be resolved, both through the civil courts and through alternative dispute resolution (ADR). The skill is to describe each route accurately for AO1, and then to evaluate them against each other for AO3, because the bigger marks in Section B come from judging which route is better and for which kind of dispute.

The answer

The civil courts

A civil claim is brought by a claimant against a defendant seeking a remedy, usually damages (compensation) or an injunction. Two courts hear claims at first instance:

• The County Court hears the great majority of civil claims, including contract and tort disputes and most personal injury claims.
• The High Court hears the largest and most complex claims through three divisions: the King's Bench Division (contract and tort), the Chancery Division (trusts, probate, company and land) and the Family Division.

The whole process is governed by the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, whose overriding objective is to enable the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost. Appeals run upward to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and ultimately the Supreme Court.

Alternative dispute resolution

ADR is any method of resolving a dispute without a full court trial. The courts actively encourage it: a party who unreasonably refuses to mediate may be penalised in costs (Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust, 2004). There are four methods, increasing in formality.

• Negotiation. The parties (or their lawyers) talk directly to reach a settlement. It is the cheapest, fastest and most private method, and most civil disputes settle this way before trial.
• Mediation. A neutral mediator facilitates discussion and helps the parties reach their own agreement; the mediator does not impose a decision. It is widely used in family and commercial disputes (for example through the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution).
• Conciliation. Similar to mediation, but the conciliator takes a more active role and may suggest a basis for settlement. ACAS uses conciliation in employment disputes.
• Arbitration. The parties agree (often by a contract clause) to refer the dispute to an arbitrator, whose decision, the award, is binding and enforceable like a court judgment under the Arbitration Act 1996. It is common in commercial and construction disputes.

Evaluating the two routes

ADR suits commercial disputes (privacy and relationships matter), family disputes (mediation reduces conflict) and low-value disputes (litigation would be disproportionate). The courts remain essential where there is a genuine point of law, a binding precedent is needed, a party will not co-operate, or a vulnerable party needs the protection of a judge.

Examples in context

A strong evaluation answer would not simply describe each method but would keep asking which route best serves the particular dispute and why.

Try this

Q1. Describe the differences between mediation, conciliation and arbitration as methods of resolving a civil dispute. [10 marks]

• What the marker wants. Precise AO1 description: mediation uses a neutral facilitator who does not decide; conciliation adds a conciliator who suggests solutions (ACAS); arbitration produces a binding, enforceable award under the Arbitration Act 1996. Use an example of each.

Q2. Discuss the extent to which the civil courts provide effective access to justice for an ordinary claimant. [20 marks]

• Cue. An AO3 evaluation: balance the authority and enforceability of a court judgment against cost, delay, complexity and the lack of legal aid in most civil cases, then judge, perhaps concluding that ADR and the small claims track widen access but litigation remains daunting for the unrepresented.