The Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) and the Meaning of 'Genuine Steps': Formalising the Common Law Requirement of 'Good Faith'

(2012) 23 Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 249

4 Pages Posted: 24 Apr 2014

See all articles by Harry Hobbs

Harry Hobbs

University of Technology Sydney, Faculty of Law

Date Written: April 24, 2012

Abstract

Prior to initiating litigation, parties should negotiate in order to limit the issues in dispute and avoid a costly court process. But what does it mean to negotiate? Historically the common law conditioned negotiation at a good faith standard – requiring parties to turn their minds to the issues in dispute and enter the process honestly and willingly. However, this standard proved difficult to grasp and many jurisdictions have since enacted legislation designed to formalise the process. This article examines the latest enactment – the Commonwealth formulation, which requires parties to “take genuine steps to resolve disputes” and compares it to both the New South Wales formulation, which requires parties “to take reasonable steps” and the common law good faith standard. This analysis will demonstrate that the concept of genuine steps formalises the common law approach, and as opposed to reasonable steps, more accurately achieves the object and purposes of alternative dispute resolution processes.

Keywords: civil procedure, dispute resolution, good faith

JEL Classification: K40, K41

Suggested Citation

Hobbs, Harry, The Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) and the Meaning of 'Genuine Steps': Formalising the Common Law Requirement of 'Good Faith' (April 24, 2012). (2012) 23 Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 249. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2428609

Harry Hobbs (Contact Author)

University of Technology Sydney, Faculty of Law ( email )

Sydney
Australia

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
77
Abstract Views
414
rank
321,275
PlumX Metrics