March 2007 - February 2008 Annual Report

Analysis and Interpretation of Statistics

Since the inception of the Code in March 2007 the DRA’s office has received 22 enquiries. Retailers made 20 of these enquiries, while 2 were made by suppliers. Of the 22 enquiries received, 2 related to s43 of the Code while the remaining 20 related to s44. Only 3 of the 22 enquiries were referred onto another body or to a solicitor, although some of the remaining 19 requested the name and contact details of a solicitor together with a request for information as to how they could progress their dispute through the DRA’s office. Each enquirer was sent an information pack informing them of the steps that they could take under the Code.

There have been 7 requests received for mediation. Of these 7, 1 did not require the appointment of a mediator as it was a section 43 matter that was able to be dealt with by the DRA directly. Of the remaining 6 requests, 3 were withdrawn after the appointment of a mediator, but before the date of mediation. 2 of the 3 were withdrawn as the parties continued to negotiate directly. The remaining matter was withdrawn by the Complainant 2 days prior to the mediation date, after the Complainant decided that his better option was to exit his agreement rather than dispute the termination notice sent to him.

3 matters have been mediated since the inception of the Code. None of these 3 have settled at mediation, although 2 of the matters have proceeded to settle in the weeks after mediation. One of our mediators reported that real progress was made during the mediation meeting, setting the scene for positive continued negotiation.

1 matter progressed from mediation to a non-binding determination made by the DRA. Despite the entrenched positions of the parties and a level of discontent between the parties after both mediation and non-binding determination, it has been reported that the parties to this dispute settled the matter in February 2008. The lawyer for the complainant contacted the DRA’s office to show an appreciation and respect for the way in which the process was administered and handled at each level.

It would appear that the effect of the determination given by the DRA has been a positive one. Since this time we have noted a preference for negotiation over mediation by the major players within the industry. From our experience this is potentially a positive result, as we have found that the development of internal dispute resolution procedures can develop from such attitudes. This in turn has the effect of creating more stable and positive working relationships, with parties attending to problems at an early stage.

At this point in time there has not been enough activity to note any emerging trend apart from the potential for strengthening early negotiation procedures, as noted above.

page 1 of 2




	March 2007 - February 2008 Annual Report Analysis and Interpretation of Statistics Since the inception of the Code in March 2007 the DRA’s office has received 22 enquiries. Retailers made 20 of these enquiries, while 2 were made by suppliers. Of the 22 enquiries received, 2 related to s43 of the Code while the remaining 20 related to s44. Only 3 of the 22 enquiries were referred onto another body or to a solicitor, although some of the remaining 19 requested the name and contact details of a solicitor together with a request for information as to how they could progress their dispute through the DRA’s office. Each enquirer was sent an information pack informing them of the steps that they could take under the Code. There have been 7 requests received for mediation. Of these 7, 1 did not require the appointment of a mediator as it was a section 43 matter that was able to be dealt with by the DRA directly. Of the remaining 6 requests, 3 were withdrawn after the appointment of a mediator, but before the date of mediation. 2 of the 3 were withdrawn as the parties continued to negotiate directly. The remaining matter was withdrawn by the Complainant 2 days prior to the mediation date, after the Complainant decided that his better option was to exit his agreement rather than dispute the termination notice sent to him. 3 matters have been mediated since the inception of the Code. None of these 3 have settled at mediation, although 2 of the matters have proceeded to settle in the weeks after mediation. One of our mediators reported that real progress was made during the mediation meeting, setting the scene for positive continued negotiation. 1 matter progressed from mediation to a non-binding determination made by the DRA. Despite the entrenched positions of the parties and a level of discontent between the parties after both mediation and non-binding determination, it has been reported that the parties to this dispute settled the matter in February 2008. The lawyer for the complainant contacted the DRA’s office to show an appreciation and respect for the way in which the process was administered and handled at each level. It would appear that the effect of the determination given by the DRA has been a positive one. Since this time we have noted a preference for negotiation over mediation by the major players within the industry. From our experience this is potentially a positive result, as we have found that the development of internal dispute resolution procedures can develop from such attitudes. This in turn has the effect of creating more stable and positive working relationships, with parties attending to problems at an early stage. At this point in time there has not been enough activity to note any emerging trend apart from the potential for strengthening early negotiation procedures, as noted above. page 1 of 2








Oilcode Dispute Resolution Adviser 2007