Face to face JSMs - a thing of the past?

I have now attended six Joint Settlement Meetings (JSMs) and one mediation since lockdown. All have ultimately resulted in the claims resolving.

However this is not an article about the benefits of modern technology or how to use Zoom/Teams/Skype or other such means of communication. There are many such articles already out there and my colleagues would certainly raise an eyebrow if I started handing out IT advice.

Nor is it an article to promote the fact that settlements can still be achieved in the current climate - clearly they can, as many will testify.  We have, on all sides, adapted well to the upheaval. These are just my reflections on a couple of features drawn from the post Covid-19 JSMs I have attended.

They have been much easier to organise.

Of course there is currently greater availability for everyone with limited travel, reduced court availability and thus, generally speaking, less congested diaries.

However as things change, surely it would still be easier to organise remote JSMs when we do not have to factor in the various participants having to travel from wherever they are located to the major cities (or even Coventry and Bolton!). 

With one exception, the JSMs themselves have been much shorter and more efficient.

On the second issue, the norm in the past was that JSMs were likely to be a whole day event, certainly including travel. So did we by default get into the position of simply filling the day and letting them drift? Was there too much discussion and debate, almost like skeleton arguments and opening speeches being rehearsed? Were unrealistic opening stances being adopted (on both sides) rather than making realistic offers from the outset? For claimants with serious injuries, did it really help them to spend a full day engaged in the process? We were often informed that claimants were struggling or tired (and they were not the only ones).

Did we get better results by meeting in person?

In the remote JSMs I have attended there certainly appeared to be more focus, speed and more sensible approaches being adopted. Is that pure coincidence or a side-effect of having nobody physically present? Is preparation better due to some of the constraints?

I don’t have all the answers to those questions, but I certainly can see, and have seen, the benefits. Interestingly many of those representing claimants that I have spoken to are raising similar issues.

Now don’t me get me wrong - there are, and will be, occasions when it is necessary and far more preferable to meet face-to face whenever the lockdown is lifted. Also, one of the things I miss is seeing clients, counsel and even my opposite number! The glass of something down the pub after the event, whether successful or not, was again part and parcel of the event and had many benefits.

Perhaps though, the future default position will be that JSMs take place remotely. I have a feeling that pre-Covid JSMs were becoming too protracted and unfocused, and over the years lost some of the original benefits. JSMs are still an excellent way of resolving high value claims but maybe this enforced flexibility in working practices may have acted as a catalyst for welcome change.

Surely if they are easier to arrange, quicker and more efficient when they do take place, and result in reduced settlement times and costs, that has to be worth considering? Solving the missed drink afterwards is a problem for another day!