Review of the Community Dispute Management Framework (CDMF)

An inter-agency committee regularly reviews the Community Dispute Management Framework to (a) strengthen neighbourliness to minimise disputes upstream, (b) promote community mediation as the primary way to resolve disputes between neighbours, and (c) provide an effective avenue for legal recourse, as a last resort, for intransigent cases.

In the current round of review, one persistent issue that the Committee identified is that many residents involved in disputes are unwilling to attend mediation, even though the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) has a high settlement rate. This could be due to a lack of awareness of the benefits of mediation, so efforts to increase public education around mediation is one area the Committee is working on.

The Committee is also aware that some residents face practical difficulties with regard to the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT). The CDRT currently takes a judge-led approach, and is not bound strictly by the rules of evidence. This flexible approach generally works well, but some residents face difficulties in resolving cases where the facts are disputed, especially where the unreasonable interference is intermittent or transient in nature, or where it is challenging to pinpoint the exact source of such interference.   

The Committee is studying a range of proposals to address these issues. 
a. Upstream, the Committee is considering how we can collaborate with residents to strengthen neighbourliness, as part of our ongoing efforts to promote gracious living. These efforts can help reduce the likelihood of disputes arising in the first instance.
b. Downstream, the Committee is considering how to strengthen our response to protracted neighbour dispute cases and see them through to resolution in a more expeditious manner. Given the low take-up rate of mediation, the Committee is looking to mandate mediation in certain circumstances, such as for protracted disputes where voluntary mediation has not been conducted. The committee is also looking into requiring claimants to attempt mediation before they can seek recourse at the CDRT. The Committee is also considering giving officers managing the cases stronger powers on issuing orders for mediation and medical assessment, warnings, and to furnish formal evidence or reports to the CDRT which may help residents pursue claims at the CDRT. We are also looking at making various procedural improvements to the CDRT to enable affected parties to obtain quick, interim relief in egregious cases.

We will provide more details of the review in due course.