The sad fact is that going to court can be expensive, as the case Gilks v Hodgson  EWCA Civ 5 ably demonstrates.
The dispute was over a lane – the Gilks wanted to use it but the Hodgsons said doing so upset the alpacas on their farm. The County Court agreed with the Gilks, the Hodgsons appealed. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part. It determined that the boundary was in the middle of the ditch, not the middle of the lane as the County Court had ruled, but did not overturn the finding of an easement by prescription (though the evidence of 20 years use was "light"). The Court's decision meant neither party “won”.
Mr Justice Clarke lamented the absurd waste of both parties’ effort, time and cost. The area of land was small and not essential to either. The Gilks won damages of £3,500, yet the case cost approximately £500,000.
The MoJ study considers whether more should be done to encourage, or require, out of court settlement. Ultimately its decision was to do nothing.
Many people believe litigation brings a certain outcome, others rely on mediation as the better approach. But as Gilks v Hogdson shows, the outcome at one court can be changed at another, higher, court hearing.