Mediation

Mediation

Share

33 Bedford Row have set up a dedicated ADR Group, which offers a full service in relation to all aspects of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Members of the group are experts in mediation, as well as arbitration and adjudication.

Members can act as the mediator, or as counsel to a party involved in a mediation.

Low to Medium value cases:

Our team of Mediators are keen to promote cost effective access to resolution , ‘on the papers’ or by way of virtual ‘face-to-face’ services

The ADR service also includes resolution of Stage 3s, Small Claim and Fast Track matters at a fixed fee. 

For further information on our feee structure and trcak record, please contact Senior Civil, Commercial and Arbitration Clerk, Mark Byrne on 0207242 6476 (Direct Line :0207 421 5568) Mobile: : 07985 615 215 / 07931 231 321 email: m.byrne@33bedfordrow.co.uk

  • Track Record: 

1. Claim against a water company relating to ownership of and responsibility for a water pipe.  Decision: Claim succeeded in part, as a section of the pipe constituted a public water mains, with the remainder constituting a private supply pipe.

2. Claim against a surveyor for failing to report substantial cracking in a property and evidence of roof spreading.  Decision: Claim did not succeed, as the evidence did not support a finding that the issues in question were visible at the time of the survey.

3. Complaint against the Solicitors Regulation Authority relating to its decision not to take regulatory action against a solicitor.  Decision: Claim did not succeed, as the Authority had appropriately justified its decision.

4. Claim against a property company for failure to disclose additional planned construction and for problems with the property.  Decision: Claim succeeded in part, resulting in both corrective action and financial compensation.

5. Claim by a school against a water company relating to a corrective bill issued when the when company had not read the school’s water meter for 3 years.  Decision: Claim succeeded and compensation awarded.

6. Claim against a property company for failing to soundproof a property in accordance with regulatory standards.  Decision: Claim succeeded, resulting in both corrective action and financial compensation.

7. Claim by a coffee shop against a water company for damage sustained and lost profit arising from problems with the company’s sewer and subsequent attempts at resolution that impacted the business.  Decision: Claim did not succeed as the company did not act negligently or otherwise wrongfully as required by Supreme Court precedent.

8. Claim against a property company for damage to the homeowner’s possessions as a result of work undertaken in the property.  Decision: Claim succeeded, resulting in financial compensation.

9. Claim by a rail company against a water company relating to charges arising from a significant and sustained leak.  Decision: Claim did not succeed, as the evidence did not support a finding that the water company was or should have been aware of the leak.

10. Claim against a property company for losses incurred due to delay in completion of a property.  Decision: Claim did not succeed, as there was inadequate causal connection between the losses claimed and the failings by the company.

 

 

 

Mediation