It has become clear in the last few years that there is a seismic shift in the international legal landscape, moving away from adversarial litigation towards collaborative, mediated resolutions. While the UK has taken some significant steps, particularly with the recent introduction of compulsory mediation for small claims, a broader look at global developments suggests that other jurisdictions are moving faster and with more comprehensive legislative intent. The letter ‘A’ in ADR is rapidly becoming less and less apposite as mediation becomes seen as a key tool in dispute resolution rather than an ‘alternative’.
The Global Standard: Institutionalisation and Enforcement
Across the globe, nations are not only encouraging mediation, they are taking steps to institutionalise it as a primary pillar of justice. India’s Mediation Act 2023, serves as a good example, providing a standalone statutory framework that treats mediated settlement agreements (MSAs) as enforceable court decrees. This removes the obstacle of having to re-litigate if a party defaults. Similarly, the UAE recently unveiled an integrated legislative framework including specialised mediation centres and a Code of Professional Conduct, positioning themselves as a leader in the ADR space.
In Jamaica, the Government has just announced that it is moving to increase the use of ADR (including mediation, arbitration and restorative justice) as a means of reducing court backlogs and curbing violence.
Regions such as Lagos in Nigeria are reporting massive success through proactive initiatives like “Settlement Weeks”, facilitating the recovery of billions in mediated claims.
In Europe, the EU’s new ADR Directive is modernising consumer dispute resolution by expanding its scope to pre- and post-contractual disputes and allowing Member States to make participation mandatory in sectors like transport and tourism. Moreover, Poland is implementing mandatory mediation for complex construction disputes starting this month (March 2026), targeting specific high-value disputes rather than just low-value claims.
The Singapore Convention
Perhaps the most telling indicator of global momentum is the Singapore Convention on Mediation, which provides a uniform framework for the enforcement of cross-border MSAs. As of 11 March 2026, 59 countries have signed and 20 have ratified the treaty, including major economies like Japan and Brazil, which officially joined in August 2025.
In contrast, while the UK signed the Convention in May 2023, it has yet to ratify it. The government remains in a “consultation” phase regarding domestic implementation. This delay will leave UK businesses at a strategic disadvantage compared to counterparts in ratified states, who can enforce settlements across borders with greater legal certainty.
The UK: Incremental -v- Transformative Change
The Labour Government was elected with a mandate for change, but UK Governments are historically prone to incremental rather than bold transformative change. The Justice system is no exception to that. The backlog in the Employment Tribunal system is a prime example of a situation that calls for transformative change. The new Employment Rights Act 2025, is likely to make the backlog even worse, but there is no sign of any sweeping or transformative change to the processes for dispute resolution that is going to help to alleviate that. Compulsory (or at least positively encouraged/promoted) mediation could definitely make a difference. There has been a very welcome move in May 2024, to introduce a mandatory mediation process for all civil money claims under £10,000 allocated to the Small Claims Track. Although this is an important step, intended to free up 5,000 sitting days per year, it remains very limited in scope. There is a possibility that this will be expanded to higher-value “Fast-track” or “Multi-track” cases, but no concrete legislative timeline exists.
Conclusion
Although there are good signs that the UK is moving towards encouraging the use of mediation, such as the willingness of courts to stay litigation to allow for mediation triggered by the recent Churchill -v- Merthyr Tydfil County Council case, these steps appear piecemeal and judge-driven, when compared to the sweeping legislative reforms in the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and South America. To avoid being left behind as a global hub for dispute resolution, the UK must move beyond small claims, expedite the ratification of the Singapore Convention, and provide a more robust institutional framework for mediation for all types of dispute resolution, but especially high value commercial claims and employment-related claims.