The Mandatory Duty of ADR: Breaking Down Rule 15(3)(d) RPC

We are looking at the strict ethical duty of a legal practitioner regarding dispute resolution under the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC) 2007.

Whenever you see Rule 15(3)(d) of the RPC, you are dealing with the mandatory duty of a lawyer to advise their client on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Here is your Extensive Breakdown of this rule, its implications, and how it is tested in practice and exams.

SEGMENT 1: THE CORE PROVISION

• The Statutory Duty: Rule 15(3)(d) of the RPC expressly provides that a lawyer shall not fail or neglect to inform their client of the option of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms before resorting to or continuing with litigation on behalf of the client.
• The Rationale: This reasoning is founded on the inherent advantages that ADR methods (such as negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration) have over traditional litigation. The primary objective is to facilitate amicable settlement and help decongest the courts of cases which can easily be settled out of court.

SEGMENT 2: ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SANCTIONS

In your Bar Finals (especially in Civil Litigation and Professional Ethics), examiners frequently test the consequences of a lawyer rushing to court without advising the client on ADR. If a legal practitioner violates Rule 15(3)(d) by failing to advise the client accordingly, the following sanctions apply:

• Professional Misconduct: It is a clear ethical breach. Under Rule 55(1) of the RPC, such a lawyer shall be guilty of professional misconduct and liable to punishment as provided in the Legal Practitioners Act.
• Personal Liability for Costs: The lawyer may be held personally liable to pay the costs of the litigation where this failure places the client at a disadvantage or leads to a frivolous suit.

SEGMENT 3: PROCEDURAL IMPLEMENTATION IN COURT RULES

To ensure strict compliance with Rule 15(3)(d) of the RPC, the High Court Rules have incorporated this ethical duty into their filing procedures:

• In Abuja: The rules mandate the filing of a Certificate of Pre-Action Counselling alongside the originating processes, wherein the lawyer certifies that they have counseled the client on the strength of the case and the opportunities available for ADR. If this is missing, the Registrar shall not accept the processes for filing.
• In Lagos: The equivalent requirement is the Pre-Action Protocol Form 01, which evidences that the parties have attempted to settle the matter out of court before resorting to litigation.

SEGMENT 4: THE EXAM TRAP (MATRIMONIAL CAUSES)

There is a major exception to the application of this rule which examiners love to test.

While ADR is highly encouraged in civil matters, ADR is NOT applicable to principal reliefs in matrimonial causes. Therefore, you cannot use ADR to grant a decree of dissolution of marriage (divorce), nullity of marriage, judicial separation, or jactitation of marriage.

However, the ADR option under Rule 15(3)(d) remains highly relevant and applicable to the ancillary reliefs in matrimonial proceedings, such as the custody of children, maintenance, and settlement of property.

SUMMARY CHECKLIST FOR EXAMS

• What does Rule 15(3)(d) RPC mandate? A lawyer must advise their client on the option of ADR before resorting to litigation.
• What is the consequence of failure? It amounts to professional misconduct, and the lawyer may be personally liable to pay litigation costs.
• How is this proven in Abuja and Lagos? By filing a Certificate of Pre-Action Counselling (Abuja) or a Pre-Action Protocol Form 01 (Lagos).
• Can ADR be used for Divorce? No, it cannot be used for principal matrimonial reliefs (dissolution, nullity, etc.), but it can be used for ancillary reliefs like child custody and maintenance.

Ready to test your knowledge?

Try this quick 3-question Joust taken straight from our past questions database.