Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021
The civil justice regime in Singapore entered a new phase of radical reforms with effect from 1 April 2022. The reforms have substantially expanded the role of amicable dispute resolution (ADR). Parties have a duty to consider ADR prior to and during civil proceedings. More significantly, the courts...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3940 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/5898/viewcontent/Legislative_Note_the_Courts_to_Order_the_Use_of_ADR_.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-smu-ink.sol_research-5898 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-smu-ink.sol_research-58982022-08-31T01:26:44Z Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON, The civil justice regime in Singapore entered a new phase of radical reforms with effect from 1 April 2022. The reforms have substantially expanded the role of amicable dispute resolution (ADR). Parties have a duty to consider ADR prior to and during civil proceedings. More significantly, the courts have been empowered to order parties to attempt ADR, taking into account the ideals of the Rules of Court and all relevant circumstances. This note analyses the key reforms relating to the use of ADR with reference to comparable English developments. It discusses the broad yet ambivalent scope of ADR that could give rise to considerable uncertainty concerning whether the parties have fulfilled their duty to consider ADR. It is also argued that the courts are likely to be guided principally by the ideals of the Rules of Court rather than the factors set out in Halsey v Keyneswhen deciding whether to order the use of ADR. However, this will be a complex consideration given the tension between the principles of proportionality and matching the appropriate process to meet the parties’ needs. This likely tension has to be acknowledged by the courts and a considered decision made on where the balance should lie. 2022-06-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3940 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/5898/viewcontent/Legislative_Note_the_Courts_to_Order_the_Use_of_ADR_.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Amicable dispute resolution civil procedure Rules of Court 2021 mandatory mediation Asian Studies Courts Dispute Resolution and Arbitration |
institution |
Singapore Management University |
building |
SMU Libraries |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
collection |
InK@SMU |
language |
English |
topic |
Amicable dispute resolution civil procedure Rules of Court 2021 mandatory mediation Asian Studies Courts Dispute Resolution and Arbitration |
spellingShingle |
Amicable dispute resolution civil procedure Rules of Court 2021 mandatory mediation Asian Studies Courts Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON, Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
description |
The civil justice regime in Singapore entered a new phase of radical reforms with effect from 1 April 2022. The reforms have substantially expanded the role of amicable dispute resolution (ADR). Parties have a duty to consider ADR prior to and during civil proceedings. More significantly, the courts have been empowered to order parties to attempt ADR, taking into account the ideals of the Rules of Court and all relevant circumstances. This note analyses the key reforms relating to the use of ADR with reference to comparable English developments. It discusses the broad yet ambivalent scope of ADR that could give rise to considerable uncertainty concerning whether the parties have fulfilled their duty to consider ADR. It is also argued that the courts are likely to be guided principally by the ideals of the Rules of Court rather than the factors set out in Halsey v Keyneswhen deciding whether to order the use of ADR. However, this will be a complex consideration given the tension between the principles of proportionality and matching the appropriate process to meet the parties’ needs. This likely tension has to be acknowledged by the courts and a considered decision made on where the balance should lie. |
format |
text |
author |
Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON, |
author_facet |
Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON, |
author_sort |
Dorcas QUEK ANDERSON, |
title |
Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
title_short |
Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
title_full |
Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
title_fullStr |
Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: The Singapore Rules of Court 2021 |
title_sort |
empowering the courts to order the use of amicable dispute resolution: the singapore rules of court 2021 |
publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
publishDate |
2022 |
url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3940 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/5898/viewcontent/Legislative_Note_the_Courts_to_Order_the_Use_of_ADR_.pdf |
_version_ |
1770576276680081408 |