The Many Faces of Court-Connected Non-Adjudicative ADR in Civil and Commercial Cases: A Comparative Study Across England and Wales, Ontario, Italy, and Turkey

This thesis provides an in-depth comparative analysis of court-connected non-adjudicative ADR reforms across four jurisdictions: England and Wales, Ontario, Italy, and Turkey. The core aim of these reforms has been to cultivate civil justice systems that are more cooperative, cost-efficient, less complex, and expedited, thereby enhancing access to justice. These jurisdictions embody the two primary legal traditions: common law, represented by England and Wales, and Ontario, and civil law, represented by Italy and Turkey. This dichotomy not only showcases the varied stages of ADR reform but also illuminates the challenges and priorities each face. In carrying out the analysis, the study employs a sectoral focus that encompasses commercial, employment, and consumer disputes. This analytical framework is specifically tailored to address the inherent power dynamics between the parties in an amicable dispute resolution setting. Through this lens, the study illuminates the pivotal role such dynamics play in shaping both the architecture and the outcomes of ADR reforms. The findings underline that the reform of civil justice is an ongoing and multifaceted endeavour. A critical analysis of the jurisdictions emphasises the need for litigants to consider or engage in ADR before resorting to court adjudication. While England and Wales, and Ontario have woven ADR into the fabric of their civil justice systems, Italy and Turkey are still navigating this integration – but all are leaning towards mandatory pre-action models. However, evaluating the effectiveness of these reforms requires a multifaceted assessment. Many of the reforms have fallen short of achieving the objectives of reducing costs, simplifying procedures, and curtailing delays. The analysis reveals that pitfalls arise from an over-emphasis on cost efficiency, which sometimes blindsides the unique sectoral characteristics of disputes and can overlook the protection of the vulnerable parties. Furthermore, the distinct legal cultures of each jurisdiction along with the increasing use of technology, add layers of complexity. The study highlights the importance of recognising and addressing these subtleties to pave the way for more tailored and impactful reforms.