Is this the moment for mandatory mediation?

Listening to Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury on Radio 4's Today programme this morning made me sit up and pay attention.  Here was an ex-President of the Supreme Court being interviewed about the possibility of an avalanche of claims coming about as a result of the pandemic crisis and advocating that "instead of going to court and having an expensive and uncertain piece of litigation, parties may be sensible to consider mediation".  He explained mediation as "a sort of organised settlement discussion trying to come to an amicable arrangement which may not be an outcome which the law would provide but may be a sensible practical arrangement that can be arrived at quickly."

It wasn't necessarily Neuberger's support of mediation that made me listen but more so that he was talking about mediation in the context of the legal world owing a duty to the rest of the world to take action to mitigate the effects of the coronavirus on business and that the government or judges might be looking to change or develop the law to deal with present crisis.  Was this a suggestion that parties should be made to mediate before going to court?  Is this a formal recognition that, in many cases brought about by the coronavirus (and otherwise), businesses are looking to preserve commercial relationships, find quick and practical solutions, and that mediation is the answer?  It remains to be seen where this conversation will lead and, indeed, what the effect of the pandemic will be on the court system but it is interesting to note that a leading judge doesn't necessarily believe that going to court will be the answer.

Lord Neuberger's comments came out a concept note on the effect of the pandemic on commercial contracts generated after a meeting at BIICL which can be found here.