An Irish Commercial Court judgment has highlighted the critical role of mediation in resolving disputes, saving time and money for the parties involved. In the case of V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited [2025] IEHC 430 , Justice Michael Twomey emphasised that mediation provides a crucial “reality check” for plaintiffs’ claims, potentially avoiding the significant costs and delays of litigation. This judgment strongly endorses Ireland’s state policy of encouraging mediated settlements.
The Judgment and the Mediation Act 2017
At the heart of this case is the Mediation Act 2017, which requires solicitors to advise their clients to consider mediation as a means of resolving disputes before initiating legal proceedings. This is not merely a suggestion but a mandatory obligation. Justice Twomey’s ruling reinforces the seriousness of this requirement. The court found that there had been non-compliance with the Act, as the required “Mediation Declaration” under Section 14 was not filed. This declaration is a sworn statement from a solicitor confirming that they have advised their client on the merits of mediation.
Justice Twomey made it clear that the court must adjourn a hearing if proceedings are issued without this declaration. This is a significant step, as it removes the court’s discretion and sends a clear message to legal practitioners that the obligations under the Mediation Act are not a mere “box-ticking exercise.”
Mediation as a “Reality Check”
A key takeaway from this judgment is Justice Twoomey’s characterisation of mediation as an opportunity for a “reality check.” Drawing on a Supreme Court precedent, he explained that courts apply “common sense and scepticism” to claims, a form of reality-checking that can be beneficially applied at a much earlier stage through mediation.
In the V Media Doo case, both the plaintiffs and the defendant were making substantial claims with damages sought of several million dollars, and estimated legal costs exceeding €1 million. Ultimately, the court found that neither party was entitled to any award, leading Justice Twomey to remark that “the only winners in this case are the lawyers.” He noted that,
“…there was no mediation and so, it appears, no reality check of the claims, not just of the plaintiffs, but also of the defendant, by an independent and objective third party.”
The Analysis section of Justice Twoomey’s ruling underpins this point as, in establishing the “factual matrix” of the plaintiff’s claims, it is evident that in the judge’s view these claims fall at an early hurdle, and it is arguable that a well-conducted mediation would have uncovered such defects before the significant time and cost of a hearing. This scenario, the judge said, should serve as a “salutary lesson for all plaintiffs” and reinforces the principle that litigation should be the “option of last resort.” An independent and objective mediator can help both sides to realistically assess the strengths and weaknesses of their cases, potentially leading to a settlement that is far more economically sensible than a protracted court battle.
Endorsement of State Policy
This judgment is a powerful endorsement of the Irish state’s policy to promote mediation; pragmatically recognising that the vast majority of civil cases will settle anyway and mediation provides a prompt and cost effective mechanism, reducing the burden on our courts. The Mediation Act 2017 was enacted to encourage a cultural shift away from litigation and towards alternative dispute resolution. By underscoring the mandatory nature of the Act’s provisions and highlighting the practical benefits of mediation, Justice Twomey’s decision gives significant weight to this policy.
The ruling sends a clear message that the judiciary will actively enforce the requirements of the Mediation Act. This, in turn, is likely to lead to greater compliance from legal practitioners and an increased uptake of mediation services. The ultimate goal is a more efficient and cost-effective justice system, where court time is reserved for those cases which genuinely cannot be resolved through other means.
In conclusion, the judgment in V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited is a significant development in Irish law. It not only clarifies solicitors’ obligations under section 14 of the Mediation Act 2017 (see Law Society guidance), but also provides a compelling judicial endorsement of mediation as a vital tool for the “reality checking” of claims, thereby saving time, money, and unnecessary stress for all parties involved.