An important focus point in any consideration of any civil law system and its capacity to effectively assist people to manage and resolve their disputes is the topic of “litigation culture” and to juxtapose and consider alongside it any other cultures that might offer a better process and better outcomes to those unfortunate enough to get caught up in a dispute or who they must crystallize a dispute in order to protect or assert certain civil rights and/or seek redress for some grievance or some some public interest cause.

A special focus of this national blog is to stimulate debate and discussion about putting up the alternative culture that resides in ADR philosophy and in ADR strategies and keep contrasting it with the long established and still overly entrenched litigation culture. We need to keep seeking the best balance between a proper continuing role for the prevailing legal culture  and the ‘adversarial mind-set’ that tends to favour litigation as the preferred model to manage and resolve disputes and non-adversarial methods and approaches that aim to bring disputants together and assist them in finding their own solutions and resolutions to their disputes instead of abdicating that personal responsibility and maturity to a judge or tribunal. 

At the heart of this lies such things as traditions, cultures, mind-sets, vested interests (or perceived vested interests), training, education, values, beliefs, politics and so on. 

We need to get all of these elements out in the open and being discussed and debated by all stakeholders and players in the game of dispute resolution, so that we can keep examining it from all possible angles with a common desire and intent to find better ways to resolve all manner of disputes more quickly and with less expense but with more sensitivity and understanding and accommodation of the needs and interests of those engaged in the dispute. 

The challenge of striking this ideal balance is big. The competing interests are many. The viewpoints are diverse and some are hard to reconcile. But one thing is hard to argue against - an ongoing discussion and conversation between ALL THE PLAYERS in what we call our civil justice system. 

I will be expressing some of my own views and ideas in future blog posts and I hope I will be able to attract some interest and participation from others whose insights and experience will substantially broaden and deepen the discussion.

Chris Whitelaw