The High Court has ruled that Irish courts can, in appropriate civil cases, order parties to attempt mediation even where one or both sides do not initially agree to it.
The issue arose in a decade-old dispute between J Burke & Associates and farmer Patrick O’Connell over €252,004 in engineering fees. The fees related to work carried out for O’Connell in litigation concerning his lands and Kilkenny County Council.
Burke asked the court not merely to invite the parties to mediate but, if necessary, to direct them to do so. O’Connell initially resisted, arguing that his position would not change, significant costs had already been incurred and mediation could simply add further expense.
Mr Justice Twomey held that the High Court has an inherent jurisdiction to order mediation as part of its power to control proceedings and administer justice efficiently. He stressed that such an order does not compel settlement: parties can leave the mediation process and retain their right to a court hearing if no agreement is reached.
The judge relied on developments including the Mediation Act 2017, existing mandatory mediation in some personal-injury cases, High Court practices requiring mediation in certain bullying and harassment claims, potential costs sanctions for unreasonable refusals to mediate and recent English authority.
He found this particular case strongly suited to mediation. It had already lasted more than ten years. The court said future legal costs could exceed the €252,004 actually in dispute, while a trial might consume about two weeks of High Court time.
The court therefore concluded that it would have been appropriate to direct mediation. However, before the ruling was finalised, O’Connell had conditionally agreed to mediate, so no compulsory order was made immediately.
A postscript records the practical outcome: when the parties returned to court on 28 July 2026, they told the judge that the dispute had settled.