Neutral Evaluation began life in courts. Judges and experienced lawyers would give parties an early, frank view of the merits so that they could settle or narrow their case. Courts still use it: federal district courts in the United States run programmes, and the English Court of Appeal has held that courts can order it.
The English Court of Appeal held that courts can order Early Neutral Evaluation even without the parties’ consent (Lomax v Lomax [2019] EWCA Civ 1467).Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, ADR notes · 2019 ↗
But the idea is much larger than litigation. An independent view on a defined question is useful wherever people with stakes must decide something together.
Before a decision
- A board testing a strategic proposal before it commits.
- An investment committee testing a thesis its own team built.
- A family deciding whether to sell, keep or split a business.
- A public body choosing between policy options under scrutiny.
- A company deciding whether an AI system is fit for the people it will affect.
During a relationship
- A Standing Evaluator for a joint venture, asked small questions before they become large ones.
- A yearly health evaluation of a major project or partnership.
- An independent read of a board paper before the meeting.
When a difference arises
- Early Neutral Evaluation of the merits, before costs escalate.
- A view on an earn-out, a delay, a coverage question or a technical cause.
- And, if the parties want a binding answer, Expert Determination of the same question.
The best time for an independent view is before anyone needs one.
This is why TheNeutralsORG™ treats evaluation as its core practice, with its own standard, its own report structure and its own certification. Mediation and the other Neutral roles remain part of the family. Evaluation is where the family starts.
TheNeutralsORG™ editorial · Essay 02 · Figures checked October 2026 · Sources & method