On which grounds may the mediation panel end a medical dispute case by a decision not to mediate at all?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In the practice file we read the mediation application and the statements of fact on which it rests, any correspondence or attendance record showing whether the applicant appeared or held back from mediation, and the papers describing what the case is about, since the third ground turns on the nature of the matter.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the three grounds as a closed list of the situations the panel is given: it may settle the case by a decision not to mediate where the applicant evades mediation without good reason and the application is thereby found groundless, where the application rests on false facts or was made for an improper purpose, or where the nature of the case makes mediation unsuitable.
Another reading stresses who does the deciding: the provision leaves each finding with the mediation panel, and it neither requires the panel to warn the applicant first nor states what may be shown against a finding, so a decision closing the case stands on the panel's own recognition of one of the grounds.
Your judgment
If the panel finds that the applicant evaded mediation without good reason, what in the file could show that the applicant's reason for holding back was in fact a good one?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to add or remove a ground, or if a court decision explains what may be shown against the panel's finding on any of the three grounds.