Facing Consequences: The Reality of Failing to Attend Mediation in Australia
Danny Jovica
May 24, 2026
Mediation serves as a fundamental component in the resolution of commercial disputes in Australia, embodied in legislation such as the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW). The decision delivered in the case of Reissis v Xafellis & Anor [2026] by the Supreme Court of New South Wales showcases the critical nature of attending court-ordered mediation, the consequences of neglecting this obligation, and the overarching impact on the legal process and resources.
In this landmark decision, the defendants were ordered to pay indemnity costs to the plaintiff after failing to attend a scheduled mediation session without a reasonable excuse. This reinforces the statutory duty of litigants to assist in the swift, fair, and economical resolution of disputes, as stipulated in s 56(3) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.
The implications of this case underscore the functions and expectations tied to mediation within the Australian legal context. The plaintiffs in this case, petitioning for further provision under the Succession Act 2006, adhered to the court's directive for a mediation session. However, the defendants neglected their obligation, suggesting a last-minute vacation of the mediation session that the court promptly dismissed.
Justice Slattery's ruling was clear-cut—avoidance of court processes, such as mediation, especially when directed under court order, disrupts not only the involved parties but also squanders valuable judicial resources. His Honour emphasized the unacceptable nature of such conduct, offering an important reminder that the blend of legal obligations with procedural processes is not to be undermined.
The financial penalties imposed on the non-compliant defendants—quantified via a $5,000 indemnity cost order—highlighted the necessity of adhering to set mediation processes. This decision served both as a direct reprimand and a preventive measure, discouraging similar future neglect of mediation and its role in efficient legal dispute resolution.
Ultimately, the Reissis v Xafellis & Anor judgment is a vital precedent. It amplifies the message that mediations are integral to the judicial and dispute resolution landscapes, demanding full commitment and compliance from parties involved. Practitioners and their clients should internalize that mediation is not just a procedural formality but a binding obligation with genuine financial and legal repercussions upon breach.
The practical takeaway for those engaging in the Australian mediation process is unmistakable—commitment to court-ordered mediation is paramount. Failure to comply may lead to significant financial penalties and delay in resolution, both of which could have been avoided through adherence to court orders.
For those seeking further insights or assistance, reach out to our experienced team at Mediator Life here: https://mediator.life/contact.
Sources:
- Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
- Succession Act 2006
- Reissis v Xafellis & Anor [2026] NSWSC 372
In this landmark decision, the defendants were ordered to pay indemnity costs to the plaintiff after failing to attend a scheduled mediation session without a reasonable excuse. This reinforces the statutory duty of litigants to assist in the swift, fair, and economical resolution of disputes, as stipulated in s 56(3) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.
The implications of this case underscore the functions and expectations tied to mediation within the Australian legal context. The plaintiffs in this case, petitioning for further provision under the Succession Act 2006, adhered to the court's directive for a mediation session. However, the defendants neglected their obligation, suggesting a last-minute vacation of the mediation session that the court promptly dismissed.
Justice Slattery's ruling was clear-cut—avoidance of court processes, such as mediation, especially when directed under court order, disrupts not only the involved parties but also squanders valuable judicial resources. His Honour emphasized the unacceptable nature of such conduct, offering an important reminder that the blend of legal obligations with procedural processes is not to be undermined.
The financial penalties imposed on the non-compliant defendants—quantified via a $5,000 indemnity cost order—highlighted the necessity of adhering to set mediation processes. This decision served both as a direct reprimand and a preventive measure, discouraging similar future neglect of mediation and its role in efficient legal dispute resolution.
Ultimately, the Reissis v Xafellis & Anor judgment is a vital precedent. It amplifies the message that mediations are integral to the judicial and dispute resolution landscapes, demanding full commitment and compliance from parties involved. Practitioners and their clients should internalize that mediation is not just a procedural formality but a binding obligation with genuine financial and legal repercussions upon breach.
The practical takeaway for those engaging in the Australian mediation process is unmistakable—commitment to court-ordered mediation is paramount. Failure to comply may lead to significant financial penalties and delay in resolution, both of which could have been avoided through adherence to court orders.
For those seeking further insights or assistance, reach out to our experienced team at Mediator Life here: https://mediator.life/contact.
Sources:
- Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
- Succession Act 2006
- Reissis v Xafellis & Anor [2026] NSWSC 372