A major bottleneck for one-stop procedures is the submission problem. An English task force recommends making the use of one-stop procedures mandatory. This also happened in the leading examples from Canada and the UAE. In line with this, mandatory mediation now exists in many states for many types of problems. Early objections came from mediators who felt that mediation should be voluntarily agreed. Data now show high rates of satisfactory resolution in mandatory procedures.
Moreover, only a small number of people tend to use mediation until strong incentives are introduced. On the other hand, mediation without the back-up of adjudication has been described by a leading author on access to justice as the “sound of one hand clapping.” Diagnosis, advice, attempts at settlement, followed by adjudication has always been the natural workflow in litigation services.
One-stop procedures can easily serve hundreds or thousands of cases, allowing for standardisation, continuous learning and a reliable revenue stream.
Smart fee systems include fee sharing by the parties, adequate timing of payments, with subsidies by government and contributions by communities benefiting from dispute resolution. Outcomes can be monitored so that clients can see their progress. Data can inform iterative upgrades of the procedure.