When to Mediate Early? A Practical Guide.

12 May When to Mediate Early? A Practical Guide.

[ Print Version – PDF ]

Escalating litigation costs, procedural friction, and lengthy delays. There are many reasons for insurance claims and disputes to stagnate. One potential solution is to mediate early.

Early mediation is not a one-size-fits-all approach; but, it can offer front-loaded and efficient opportunities for resolution in the right circumstances. 

This paper offers a practical guide for claims, insurance professionals and lawyers who are thinking about when and why they might choose to mediate early. It also delves into some anticipated challenges, provides suggestions for overcoming them, and offers a practical decision framework for matching the right mediation process to the facts of a matter or claim.

1. What Is Early Mediation And How Does It Differ From Traditional Mediation?

Early mediation is a proactive approach that takes place either before a claim is issued or shortly after litigation begins. Taking part in mediation at this stage of a file requires a shift in mindset. Instead of waiting for pleadings, discoveries, and expert reports to begin meaningful negotiations, participants focus on what’s sufficient, not exhaustive, to make informed risk-management decisions.

To understand the value of early mediation, it’s important to understand how its constituent parts differ from the more familiar, traditional model.

This comparison makes one thing clear: early mediation is not simply the same process done sooner; it’s a different philosophy. By focusing on what matters most (information, communication, and risk management), effective and appropriate early mediation can resolve files or narrow the issues in others.

2. Why Mediate Early

When mediation happens after the pleadings are closed and discoveries have been completed, the parties’ positions can be entrenched. By that point, substantial time and resources have been spent hardening the opposing views which can sometimes make mutually acceptable settlements harder to come by.

Waiting too long may result in missed opportunities.

Some benefits of early mediations include:

1. Cost Savings.
   Legal fees and expert costs escalate rapidly once litigation begins and evolves. Avoiding these costs helps insurers and claims representatives more efficiently manage files and reduce indemnity exposure. Lawyers also benefit by freeing up time that could be spent on other or more complex matters.
2. Earlier certainty.
   An early resolution helps insurers close files, release reserves, and give claimants closure sooner, creating operational and financial predictability.
3. Avoiding escalation.
   The longer a dispute lingers, the more entrenched parties tend to become. Early but meaningful dialogue focussed on problem-solving rather than posturing can create an implied buy-in, encouraging parties to engage in genuine settlement discussions before positions harden and costs escalate. Moreover, the longer a file remains unresolved, the more likely it is that claimants will be exposed to comparisons to other claims from family or friends, even though those situations are often not truly comparable.
4. Preserving negotiating capital.
   Once trial preparation begins, flexibility narrows. Early mediation allows creative, interest-based outcomes that are often unavailable later in the litigation cycle.

Many files are more ripe for resolution than they appear and simply require a calibration of the process: identifying what information is truly necessary, agreeing on what can be deferred, and designing a structure that fits the matter or claim. The key question to answer is whether the parties have enough information to settle sensibly and to justify the outcome if the file was later reviewed or audited. No one should be putting their neck on the line. This is not an invitation to wilful blindness. As beneficial as early mediation can be, it is not appropriate for all cases.

3. Challenges and Resistance to Early Mediation

Even when the logic of early mediation seems clear, hesitation frequently remains among one or more participants.

1. It’s too soon.
   Key facts may still be unknown, experts haven’t reported, or disclosure is incomplete.
2. Perceived weakness.
   Does proposing mediation early signal concern or desperation?
3. Information imbalance.
   One party may hold documents or data the other hasn’t yet seen, creating reluctance to negotiate.
4. Counsel hesitation.
   If counsel have already been retained, they may prefer to fully understand their case, or ensure their client feels fully prepared and ready before engaging.
5. Cost skepticism.
   Participants may question whether early mediation adds unnecessary expense rather than saving it.
6. It’s different, we don’t like change!

4. Addressing Resistance to Early Mediation

To succeed, early mediation must be approached deliberately from all sides, with transparency about assumptions and agreement on what information will be exchanged. It also requires a common goal and shared understanding that new evidence may require a follow-up session or process adjustment later. When handled this way, early mediation becomes a strategic exercise in managing risk, not a gamble on incomplete information.

For insurance professionals (claims and lawyers) who face internal or external resistance to early mediation, here are some practical ways to address those concerns and keep the process moving forward:

1. 1. Reframe early mediation as due diligence.
   Rather than pitching early mediation as a replacement for litigation, present it as a risk-management exercise. An early session can expose information gaps, clarify liability issues, and set realistic expectations, serving as a stepping stone toward resolution even if settlement does not occur immediately.
2. 2. Define ‘Enough Information’ up front.
   Agree in advance what both sides need in order to meaningfully participate. This might be a few core documents, such as a police or occurrence report, income tax returns or hospital or medical notes and records. The mediator can help canvas what’s essential versus simply helpful.
3. 3. Use confidentiality to encourage openness.
   Mediation discussions are confidential and without prejudice. Reinforcing this protection early reassures participants that exploratory or creative proposals will not weaken their legal position if the matter does not resolve. This point is particularly important at the adjuster-level, where preliminary settlement conversations often occur before defence counsel are assigned.Engaging a mediator during preliminary adjuster-level discussions creates a protected environment where realistic numbers and candid assessments can be explored without strategic risk. In that space, a mediator can make a meaningful and worthwhile difference.
4. 4. If you’re a claims professional, maintain counsel engagement and collaboration.
   Early mediation looks different depending on whether counsel have been retained. The approach should be calibrated accordingly.

   a) Pre-litigation (no counsel retained).
   At the adjuster-level, discussions may be occurring directly between the claims professional and the claimant. In that setting, there may be no lawyers involved at all. Early mediation can still add structure and protection: the mediator can help define what information will be exchanged, clarify confidentiality expectations, and ensure the claimant understands the process. If either side later retains counsel, the groundwork has been laid without compromising anyone’s position.

   b) Once counsel is retained.
   When lawyers are involved, whether pre-litigation or post-filing, it is critical to keep them involved and engaged in the process. Some counsel may worry about being sidelined or losing strategic control. That concern can be addressed by involving them in designing the mediation structure, approving document lists, and defining ground rules. A short process agreement outlining what will be shared, when, and under what confidentiality terms can strengthen trust and alignment.

   A mediator’s role is to complement, not replace, the advocates.

5. 5. Plan for flexibility.
   Not every issue must be resolved in one sitting. Early mediation can set the stage for phased negotiation or a later follow-up once additional information is produced or emerges.

Early mediation succeeds when it is seen as an opportunity rather than a risk. For example, where the parties have already attempted to resolve the matter through an exchange of settlement proposals at the adjuster level, the involvement of a mediator can introduce neutral reality testing. A mediator’s impartial perspective can assist in questioning or challenging the assumptions on which each party relies. When tailored to the circumstances of the file, early mediation becomes a continuation of good-faith resolution efforts, rather than a departure from them.

5. Decision Framework: Matching the Process to the File

Is Early Mediation Possible and Appropriate?

In addition to asking whether a file is “ready,” the key consideration should be whether early engagement will help achieve the objectives for the matter or claim.

Consider using this simple decision path:

1. 1. Assess complexity.
   Is this likely to be a multi-party file? Are there fundamental questions of law in addition to questions of fact? Are the core issues in dispute identifiable to allow for a productive discussion?
2. 2. Evaluate information required.
   Is sufficient information available to meaningfully discuss the matter in terms of value and risk? If not, is it possible and reasonable to obtain this information before the litigation evolves further?
3. 3. Understand urgency.
   Is there a compelling reason for early mediation? Is there a risk that positions will harden as litigation progresses? Would the claimant benefit from early resolution or prefer to avoid the costs and burdens of litigation where possible? Momentum can be valuable and delay can be costly, and the time value of money should not be overlooked.
4. 4. Gauge motivation, openness, and flexibility.
   Are decision-makers available and willing to engage candidly in a process designed to be confidential and protected? Is counsel pragmatic or more likely to advance unrealistic numbers in hopes of influencing reserves or shifting internal handling? Are the parties receptive to a process that may need to be adapted if new information materially changes the outlook of the file? Early mediation should be seen as structured exploration, not positional entrenchment.

Acting On Your Assessment

1. 1. Despite its advantages, early mediation isn’t always the right fit. If you determine the case genuinely requires more information (such as expert evidence or full oral and documentary discovery), more time to gain a fuller understanding of damages or coverage, or that the parties involved may interpret your proposal of an early mediation as a sign of weakness or as an ambush, a traditional or mid-stage mediation can be more effective.
   2. If your assessment suggests that early mediation is appropriate and potentially beneficial, the next step is to consult with a mediator about how to design a process that is calibrated to the matter or claim, including a streamlined exchange of core information and documentation.For example, in an early mediation for a personal injury matter when formal mediation briefs are optional, a concise questionnaire or fact sheet can be employed to exchange the core information necessary to negotiate responsibly.
   3. This may include:
      1. Incident overview: date of loss, type of claim (MVA, slip and fall, property, other), and whether a Statement of Claim or Defence has been filed.
      2. Claimant details: name, date of birth, legal representation, and contact information.
      3. Parties involved: including the relevant insurer.
      4. Liability summary: whether liability is in issue, a brief description of what occurred (20 words or less), and whether there are witnesses or credibility concerns.
      5. Post-incident care: ambulance attendance, hospital involvement, and first medical visit.
      6. Injuries: condition immediately after the loss and current status.
      7. Income loss: employment details and available benefits (IRBs, STD, LTD, or other collateral coverage).
      8. Treatment: nature of treatment, funding source (work benefits or accident benefits), and outstanding needs.
      9. Out-of-pocket expenses: prescriptions, physiotherapy, transportation, and similar losses.
      10. Causation considerations: any relevant pre-existing injuries or conditions.
      11. Supporting materials: key documents, photos, or videos.

Conclusion

Early mediation does not reject the traditional model. It simply moves the conversation to a point where meaningful dialogue can occur sooner, often at lower cost and with greater flexibility. It is not about rushing the process; it is about right-sizing it.

Traditional mediation remains invaluable for complex or highly contested cases. But many files, particularly in the insurance and personal-injury realm, are well suited to early engagement. The challenge is recognizing those opportunities and approaching them with intention.

At Cooper Mediation, we will work with counsel and insurance professionals to assess whether early mediation is appropriate for a particular file. We are always happy to discuss whether the process may assist in moving a matter forward.

About Jonathan Cooper

Jonathan Cooper mediates primarily, but not exclusively, in the area of personal injury and insurance. Jon has been inducted to the Canadian Academy of Distinguished Neutrals (CADN) and the International Academy of Mediators (IAM). Both the CADN and the IAM are invitation-only organizations consisting of the most successful commercial mediators in the world who must adhere to the highest practice and ethical qualifications.

Jon can be reached at jon@coopermediation.ca or at (647) 993-2667.

To schedule a mediation with Jon, visit: https://coopermediation.ca/jonathans-online-calendar/.

About Cooepr Mediation Inc. (CMI)

Cooper Mediation Inc. is a highly respected and sought-after Toronto-based firm offering mediation and arbitration services to Ontario clients. CMI was founded by Vance Cooper after he transitioned out of his legal practice, which began in 1985, to focus on mediation. Building a strong reputation for his tact and ability to handle complex matters, he became an in-demand mediator. Serving as a trusted mentor to Jonathan Cooper and Logan Cooper, who joined CMI in 2014 and 2017, respectively, CMI has grown to have a mediator for all types of matters and for every budget. For more information visit: www.coopermediation.ca.