Lord Justice Mummery gave the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Bradford v James [2008]. The dispute was over a strip of farm courtyard 3.7 metres wide, used for parking and access. The judge pointed out that the extreme acrimony between the neighbours was nothing new, it is a common feature. This is how he opened his judgment:
“There are too many calamitous neighbour disputes in the courts. Greater use should be made of the services of local mediators, who have specialist legal and surveying skills and are experienced in alternative dispute resolution. An attempt at mediation should be made right at the beginning of the dispute and certainly well before things turn nasty and become expensive. By the time neighbours get to court it is often too late for court-based ADR and mediation schemes to have much impact. Litigation hardens attitudes. Costs become an additional aggravating issue. Almost by its own momentum the case that cried out for compromise moves onwards and upwards to a conclusion that is disastrous for one of the parties, possibly for both.”
Lawyers have a clearly stated professional duty to advise their clients of the availability of mediation as a way to resolve such as dispute but they can not force their clients to accept this advice.
Maybe we should re-word an old adage and include it in the client care letter - “a boundary litigant and his money are easily parted.”
