Is the phrase 'friendly litigation' used by GOP Senator Josh Hawley a standard phrase?

[Northern_Piper]

@Northern_Piper

It comes up in commercial litigation. Suppose you have two companies with a long-standing commercial relationship which they want to maintain, but there’s a clause in one of their contracts that is ambiguous. They simply cannot agree on how it should be interpreted. They don’t want to tear up their entire relationship over one contract, but they each owe a duty to their respective shareholders to do their best to advance their positions. In that case, they might go to court to have the contractual issue resolved, but hope to maintain the overall good relationship. That’s friendly litigation.

I just happened to come across a case which is an example of this type of litigation: Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario v. The Coniagas Reduction Company, Limited, [1933] UKPC 44, on appeal from the Ontario Supreme Court to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London.

At issue was an agreement between two companies that apparently had a good working relationship, but they could not determine if the agreement (which they had inherited from their predecessors) was perpetual in nature. So they went to court:

The action was brought by the respondent, by agreement with the appellant, in order that their rights under the agreement should be ascertained…

There must have been a lot of money at stake, to take it all the way to the JCPC.