What is a mediation clause in a commercial contract?

In many commercial contracts, one of the dispute resolution avenues offered is mediation. However, it is important that these mediation clauses are drafted tightly, in order to be valid.

Essentially, to be valid, a mediation clause in a commercial contract must clearly describe the steps which the parties are required to take or incorporate a structure for a mediation. A clause that simply requires the parties to attempt to resolve a dispute through mediation, has been regarded as unenforceable. The clause was held as uncertain where it simply stated that the dispute shall be submitted to a ‘Third Party Mediation Procedure.’

A mediation clause may be found to be uncertain and unenforceable if it does not state the person who is to deal with the dispute, what type of disputes are to be mediated, how the mediator is to be appointed or who is to bear the costs of the mediator, as some examples.

Why are these clauses helpful?

A dispute resolution clause specifying that an alternative process should be adhered to when a dispute arises, avoids the costs, disruption and delays involved in litigating disputes, provides the parties with flexibility and an element of control over the process and their dispute.

So what constitutes a valid and enforceable mediation clause in a commercial contract?

The Australian Dispute Centre (ADC) provides a guideline of a sample simple clause that can be inserted into commercial contracts. For instance:-

  1. “Mediation”

a. The parties shall endeavour to settle any dispute arising out of or relating to this agreement, including with regard to it existence, validity or termination, by mediation administered by the Australian Dispute Centre (ADC) before having recourse to arbitration or litigation.

b. The mediation shall be conducted in accordance with the ADC Guidelines for Commercial Mediation operating at the time of the matter is referred to the ADC (the Guidelines).

c. The terms of the Guidelines are hereby deemed incorporated into this agreement.

d. This clause shall survive termination of this agreement.”

As you can see, the above example ADC clause provides clarity as to the type of disputes the clause is operates on, the manner in which the mediation process is to be administered and the Guidelines which the mediation process must follow.

Case study

Dispute resolution clauses are often incorporated into commercial contracts without thought of their implications. The case of Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Hannigan [2020] NSWCA 82 provides insight as to why the wording of dispute resolution clauses matters. This case involved Inghams and Hannigan, who had a grower agreement between them regarding the supply of chickens (Agreement).

Inghams in 2017, attempted to terminate the Agreement. Hannigan disputed this, issued proceedings and was successful in his claim for ‘wrongful termination.’ Hannigan did not seek damages at this time.

Hannigan in 2019, issued a notice of dispute seeking unliquidated damages for the loss incurred during the ‘wrongful termination’ period in which the Agreement.
In a nutshell, clause 23 of the Agreement contained a detailed dispute resolution process, which essentially provided that dispute resolution of all disputes should be via a mediation, and if unsuccessful, arbitration for any disputes that concern monetary amounts payable and/or owing to either party under the Agreement.

Inghams and Hannigans dispute failed to resolve at mediation. Thus, Hannigan sought to have the matter dealt with by arbitration. Inghams then issued proceedings to restrain the referral to arbitration on the basis that:

(a) the dispute did not fall within the ambit of clause 23.6.1 of the Agreement; or, in the alternative;

(b) Hannigan had waived his right to insist on compliance with clause 23 of the Agreement as a result of the 2017 proceedings.

At first instance, the Court found in Hannigan’s favour and determined that the claim fell within the construction of clause 23.6.1.

On Appeal, the Court of Appeal, by a majority 2:1 decision, reversed the primary judges decision and found that Hannigan’s claim for unliquidated damages for breach of contract was not a claim under the Agreement. Thus, it did not fall within the scope of clause 23 requiring arbitration.

The majority held that the wording ‘monetary amount payable and/or owed’ referred to a payment obligation of one party to the other. Read together with the wording ‘under this agreement’, it was found that the clause in fact required that the Agreement be the source of the payment obligation to enliven the requirement to arbitrate. Thus, Hannigans claim for unliquidated damages was determined to be outside the scope of the clause.

The dissent between the majority and Bell P turned on whether an assessment for unliquidated damages for breach of contract is governed by the Agreement. The majority found that liquidated damages were a right of recovery created by the contract due to a breach, and unliquidated damages for a breach are compensation determined by the Court (common law quantum of damages).

In essence, Bell P agreed with the majority on the construction of ‘arise out of this agreement,’ but concluded differently on the interpretation of ‘under this agreement.’

Key takeaways

Whilst it is clear that the parties in the Inghams case took a lot of care when drafting the dispute resolution clauses in their agreement, allowing for only a subset of disputes to be referred to arbitration, via the tiered clauses, created uncertainty in the application of the dispute resolution process. This uncertainty resulted in extensive and costly litigation about what disputes could be arbitrated under the Agreement; likely uncontemplated by the Agreement’s drafter.

Accordingly, one should think carefully as to whether tiered dispute resolution clauses are necessary. Where there is no tiered dispute resolution processes allowed for in a contract, the dispute resolution clause should be drafted as broadly as possible to accommodate all disputes.

Should you have any queries relating to appropriate mediation clauses in your commercial contracts, or their applicability, please do not hesitate to contact Danielle Snell or Robert McGirr of Elit Lawyers by McGirr and Snell.

Share
Email
Print

Get in touch

With us personally, it is just one more way we’re different.

Danielle Snell

CO-FOUNDER AND MANAGING PARTNER

.

Robert McGirr

CO-FOUNDER AND PARTNER

.

"

"We were forced to issue legal proceedings against the insurer for a number of reasons including disagreement about the amount of money that was required to be paid out under the policy to reinstate our home. I want to express our deepest heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for all Elit did for our family throughout this matter."

Insurance Policy Holder

Home owner

Thank you to Danielle and Mark and the Elit team for all their hard work in acting for myself and my family against a large international insurer following a fire sustained at our home. We were forced to issue legal proceedings against the insurer for a number of reasons including disagreement about the amount of money that was required to be paid out under the policy to reinstate our home. I want to express our deepest heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for all Elit did for our family throughout this matter.
The work of Danielle and Mark was professional, consistent and to the highest standard throughout this process. I was so impressed by each of the team. It wasn’t just their exceptional professional work that left the impression, but more importantly, their interactions as good, decent, kind individuals. Thank you Elit for captaining this litigation ship throughout the tiresome journey! We really appreciate everything you have done for us. I hope and pray that each one of you has a share in some of the comfort you have provided my family in your own lives.

"

"Being subject to malicious false statements was very stressful, as I have always conducted myself with professionalism and integrity.  As a result of the action taken by Robert McGirr & Elit Lawyers, the false statements were retracted, I received a formal apology and was paid my legal costs. "

Defamation

Plaintiff

I was engaged to appear on behalf of a resident at an aged care home in a proceeding before the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (TASCAT). A false and defamatory email was sent by a senior executive of the home about my conduct at the hearing to a number of third parties.

The false statements contained in that email were serious and damaging to my reputation, and included amongst other things, an imputation of criminality, which if proven to be true, could have resulted in a term of imprisonment. Being subject to malicious false statements was very stressful, as I have always conducted myself with professionalism and integrity. 

As a result of the action taken by Robert McGirr and Elit Lawyers, the false statements were retracted, I received a formal apology and was paid my legal costs. I could not have achieved this outcome without the assistance of Robert. I felt informed and comforted throughout the process and am very grateful for the early result that was achieved. 

"

"I was devastated when I learnt of a very serious defamatory publication made against me. I was so grateful to Danielle and the legal team who were able to obtain a pseudonym order in my favour so that I was able to advance defamation proceedings with anonymity."

Defamation

Plaintiff

I was devastated when I learnt of a very serious defamatory publication made against me.

I was concerned that bringing a Court proceeding would lead to widespread media reporting which would in turn repeat the allegations made against me and cause even more harm to my reputation because let’s face it – mud sticks.

I was so grateful to Danielle and the legal team who were able to obtain a pseudonym order in my favour so that I was able to advance defamation proceedings against the publishers with anonymity and be comforted that the defamatory content linked to my name would not be further spread.

I felt vindicated at the end of the matter and will always look back on the experience as a difficult one but knowing that issuing the court proceedings was what I had to do in order to achieve redress and restore my reputation.

"

"When we were targeted by a vexatious and unfounded online attack, I turned to Robert, Danielle, and Elit for advice. As I am a lawyer myself, Elit’s ability to zone in so quickly on what was best for us really impressed me. "

Defamation

Lawyer and Business Owner

As a lawyer and business owner, I take our professional reputation seriously.

When we were targeted by a vexatious and unfounded online attack, I turned to Robert, Danielle, and Elit for advice. Their calm, clear, and strategic guidance was exactly what we needed. They quickly understood the key issues and provided practical options that prioritised our values and professional standing.

I was impressed with their ability to get across the key issues and provide real life practical advice during this critical time which really centred around us and what was best for our business.

As I am a lawyer myself, Elit’s ability to zone in so quickly on what was best for us really impressed me.

"

"My business was sued for defamation. The Eit team were able to pinpoint the weaknesses in the other side’s case and were able to resolve the proceeding on very favourable terms for us."

CEO

Medical Industry

My business was sued for defamation and my insurance company appointed Aggie, Danielle, Robert and the Elit team to act in my defence of the proceeding.

I was astounded by the fact that the Eit team were able to pinpoint the weaknesses in the other side’s case and after bringing an interlocutory application on my behalf, they were able to resolve the proceeding on very favourable terms for us.

I felt informed and comforted throughout the process and am very grateful for the early result that was achieved.

"

"I felt comforted and informed throughout the legal process and was happy with the early resolution of the case which achieved my ultimate objectives."

Director

ASX Listed Company

Danielle and team acted on behalf of myself and my fellow directors of an ASX listed company in the Supreme Court of Western Australia involving repeated attacks and defamatory content being posted about us on a forum website. The third party website operator was also joined to the proceeding.

Given the personal attacks made against me and my fellow directors, it was a difficult situation over an extended period and I felt comforted and informed throughout the legal process and was happy with the early resolution of the case which achieved my ultimate objectives to have the content removed and undertakings that no future defamatory content would be published by the person involved.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Search