Court-Annexed Mediation Is Already Operational. Most Advocates Are Not Ready.

Key Data

STAJ mandates court-annexed mediation as a primary dispute resolution mechanism. The programme is already operational in several jurisdictions. Under the framework, judges can refer cases to mediation before they proceed to hearing. Successful mediation produces a binding consent order.

What Is Happening

Court-annexed mediation is scaling rapidly and the Judiciary has built it into the STAJ performance framework, meaning judges will be measured on diversion rates. This creates institutional incentives to refer cases to mediation rather than allow them to proceed through conventional litigation timelines.

Why It Is Happening

The Judiciary's case backlog has been a persistent institutional problem. Between 2012 and 2022, despite significant investments in judicial capacity, new filings continued to outpace disposals in several court divisions. Mediation is a capacity strategy: it resolves disputes faster, at lower cost, and frees judicial time for matters that genuinely require adjudication. The ELRC's 60% backlog reduction between 2018/2019 and 2024/2025 demonstrates what targeted reform can achieve.

Practice Impact and Revenue

For litigation advocates, the practical implication is immediate. Cases you file may be referred to mediation before a single hearing date is set. If you are not prepared to represent your client in mediation, you are not prepared to practise.

For conveyancing lawyers handling land disputes, mediation is particularly likely to be the preferred mechanism because land cases are high-volume and often involve relationships (neighbours, families, communities) that benefit from negotiated solutions.

For employment lawyers, the ELRC's demonstrated success in backlog reduction suggests that employment disputes will be among the first to see aggressive mediation referrals.

The mediation fee structure is different from the litigation fee structure. Mediations are typically resolved in one to three sessions, not over months or years. Advocates must adjust their pricing models. Retainer-based or fixed-fee arrangements become more appropriate than hourly or appearance-based billing. Advocates accredited as mediators earn fees from two sides: representing clients in mediation and serving as mediators appointed by the court.

Strategic Insight — What Most Advocates Will Miss

The hidden shift here is in judicial incentives. When judges are measured on mediation referral rates, they will refer. This is not a suggestion. It is a performance metric. Advocates who show up unprepared for mediation will find themselves before judges who expected them to be ready.