The mediation act 2017, the injuries resolution board service and court-directed mediation
Introduction
The great majority of personal injury claims settle. Most settle by negotiation between solicitors and insurers, often on the steps of the court. Mediation offers a structured alternative in which an independent mediator helps the parties reach agreement, in private, at a time and cost of their choosing.
Mediation has been available in Ireland for many years but has been little used in personal injury claims. That is changing. The Injuries Resolution Board now offers mediation at the pre-litigation stage, the courts have confirmed a power to direct parties to mediate, and Government policy is moving towards making mediation the default. This guide explains the options and when each is likely to help.
The Law
The Mediation Act 2017 defines mediation as a confidential, facilitative and voluntary process in which the parties, with the assistance of a mediator, attempt to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. Either party may withdraw at any time, and it is for the parties, not the mediator, to determine the outcome. Everything said in mediation is confidential and without prejudice to any litigation. Section 14 of the Act requires a solicitor, before issuing proceedings, to advise the client to consider mediation and to swear a statutory declaration that this was done.
Under the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022, the Board offers mediation across all categories of claim. It is voluntary and requires both parties to agree. Unlike the Board’s assessment function, mediation can address disputed liability, contributory negligence, the extent of injury and future treatment. An agreement reached in mediation is reduced to writing, a ten-day cooling-off period follows, and the Board then issues an order to pay with the standing of a court order. If mediation fails, the claim proceeds to assessment where the respondent has consented, or is released for litigation.
Once proceedings have issued, section 15 of the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 permits the court, on application, to direct the parties to a personal injuries action to meet to discuss settlement, and section 16 imposes costs consequences for non-compliance. In J Burke & Associates Ltd v O’Connell (High Court, 20 May 2026) the court held that it has an inherent jurisdiction to order parties to attempt mediation in any civil case. Under section 169 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, an unreasonable refusal to mediate may be reflected in the costs order at the end of the case.
Practical Steps
Consider mediation at the Board stage where liability or contributory negligence is genuinely in dispute, since those are matters the Board cannot otherwise resolve, and where the injury has stabilised sufficiently to be valued. Mediation is less useful where the only issue is the value of an admitted injury, which the Board’s assessment addresses directly, or where the medical picture is still developing.
Prepare for mediation as for a hearing. The mediator will not decide anything, but the other side will be persuaded only by evidence: the medical reports, the schedule of special damages, the engineering evidence on liability. A party who arrives with a clear valuation, a documented loss and a realistic bottom line will do better than one who arrives to see what is offered.
Understand what is and is not binding. A mediated agreement is binding once the cooling-off period has passed or, in litigation, once it is signed and reflected in a court order. Until then, either party may withdraw. Where State benefits are recoverable, or the plaintiff is a child, the same rules apply as to any settlement.
Where an insurer refuses to engage, an application for a direction under section 15 or under the inherent jurisdiction should be considered. Since Burke, a party who resists mediation without good reason faces both a direction and a costs risk.
Takeaway
Mediation does not change what a claim is worth. It changes how quickly, how privately and at what cost that value is reached. For an injured person whose claim is well prepared, it offers a route to resolution measured in months rather than years, without the exposure of a trial.
The direction of law and policy is unmistakable: the courts have the power to require it, the Board offers it, and the Government intends to make it the default. Anyone bringing a claim should expect to be asked to mediate, and should be ready to do so well.
Further information
This article was prepared for informational purposes only. For further advice, please email workclaim@crushell.ie or contact the offices of Crushell & Co Solicitors.
About Crushell & Co
Crushell & Co is a specialist firm advising on the application of law in the Irish workplace.
Our Dublin-based solicitors have particular expertise in workplace injury litigation, regularly acting on behalf of employees who have suffered injuries arising from unsafe systems of work, inadequate training, or failures in workplace safety procedures.
We understand that a workplace injury can have serious consequences for an individual’s health, livelihood, and financial security. We work closely with our clients to identify the root causes of workplace accidents, gather the necessary evidence, and advance strong, well-supported claims for compensation.
We are experienced in pursuing workplace injury claims through the Courts and achieving meaningful outcomes for injured workers, while providing clear and practical guidance at every stage of the process.
We translate complex legal issues into practical legal options, adapting our strategy to meet each client’s specific circumstances and objectives.
Connect: @CrushellLaw or www.crushell.ie
