News & Updates

July 2016

Viewing posts from July , 2016

Michelin guide assessing Mediation Friendliness in EU states

Michelin guide to mediation is from the new book written by Nadja Alexander and Sabine Walsh, which provides guidance on the Mediation Friendliness of each of the EU jurisdictions. It is the first of its kind to compare and contrast the mediation law and regulatory framework in each state, and offers insight for cross-border practitioners and mediation users seeking the best jurisdiction to conduct their mediation.

For more information, please click here.

Brexit and EU mediation —Kluwer Mediation Blog


In the aftermath of the Brexit vote and the appointment of Theresa May as England’s Prime Minister, there are many things to think about and there will be much to negotiate. While some commentators anticipate a U-turn on Brexit, Theresa May has made it clear that “Brexit means Brexit” – whatever that means.

In this post, I want to pay attention to cross-border mediation within the EU and, in particular, the impact Brexit may have on how London is perceived as a venue for cross-border mediation within the EU.

Currently within the EU, there are a number of mechanisms available to support cross-border mediation and the recognition and enforcement of cross-border mediated settlement agreements. These include mechanisms related to the EU Directive on Mediation in Civil and Commercial Matters , the Rome I Regulation and the Brussels 1 Regulation.

Like other member states, England has complied with the EU Directive (see the The Cross-Border Mediation (EU Directive) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1133). It is unlikely that it would repeal these Regulations in the event of a Brexit. This is good thing in terms of certainty and clarity in relation to English cross-border mediation law. However, the Regulations deal only with enforceability, protection of mediators from giving “mediation” evidence in court, and the impact of mediation on litigation limitation periods. Other aspects of cross-border mediation law such as parties’ rights and obligations in relation to confidentiality and privilege remain in the general principles of the common law. And, of course, common law principles can sometimes operate quite differently from civil law principles. This is where choice of court and choice of law become really important. Given the potentially significant difference among civil law codes and the common law, disputing parties want to be sure:
– that they have expressly identified the laws and jurisdictions applicable to any dispute between them; and that
– in the event that they have not been clear in relation to the above, that they know which rules will be used to determine the applicable law and jurisdiction for their case.

In short therefore, where parties clearly state in writing the law (or laws) they want to govern their dispute and identify their jurisdiction of choice, then all is well. However where the choice of jurisdiction and law are not clear, there are rules to determine the relevant court and the governing laws. Within the EU there are two main Regulations that aim to achieve a harmonised set of rules for EU member states in this regard: the Rome I and Brussels I Regulations.

And so I now turn to the operation of these two Regulations and the possible implications for English mediation in a post Brexit world.

The Rome I Regulation aims to create a harmonised, if not a unified, choice of law system in contracts within the EU. In the context of cross-border mediation, there are three types of contract in mediation settings:
– An agreement between the parties to engage in mediation: this may take the form of a mediation clause in a commercial contract or a separate agreement between the parties.
– An agreement between the mediator(s) and the conflicting parties referred to as a mediation agreement, which regulates the rights and obligations of the signatories in relation to the mediation process.
– A mediated settlement agreement between the parties, which contains the terms of settlement of their dispute.

In absence of the parties making a clear selection of law to govern their dispute and the mediation process itself, Rome I establishes various rules to determine the applicable law. In this way it aims to provide a degree of certainty for those embarking on cross-border mediation within the EU. This is particularly important with respect to the English common law system, which can contain quite different legal constructs from civil law jurisdictions. For example, the legal construct of “without prejudice” privilege is not found in civil law EU jurisdictions. If England really does leave the EU, it will fall outside the unifying reach of Rome I. Unless it negotiates its way in again through new arrangements, this situation will create significant uncertainty in relation to how the applicable law will be determined. England will go back to its own general choice-of-law rules (rather than Rome I) to determine which laws will apply in relation to the dispute including rights and obligations associated with mediating the dispute.

Then there is the Brussels I Regulation. The Brussels I Regulation deals with court jurisdiction and judgment recognition issues in virtually all civil and commercial matters within the EU. In other words it is about choice of court, whereas Rome I is about choice of law. It aims to harmonise the rules on jurisdiction and prevent parallel litigation. Generally this Regulation is likely to play an increasing role in the development of European mediation law to the extent that:
– Courts make decisions about the recognition and enforcement of mediation clauses, agreements to mediate and mediated settlement agreements in their various contractual forms;
– Mediated settlement agreements take the form of a court order, court consent award or judgment; and
– Courts make decisions about other aspects of mediation such as confidentiality and admissibility of mediation evidence.

In addition, there are specific provisions in relation to cross-border mediated settlement agreements involving a pecuniary claims. This type of mediated settlement agreement can be made enforceable in the State of origin and subsequently enforced in another Member State by virtue of Article 24 or 25 of the Regulation No 805/2004. If it involves the delivery of specific assets it can be declared enforceable in another Member State according to Article 58 of the Brussels I Regulation.

At the same time, all eyes are now looking beyond the EU at UNCITRAL as its Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation) focuses its efforts on enforceability of cross-border mediated settlement agreements and a potential multi-lateral convention along the lines of the highly successful New York Convention in relation to foreign arbitral awards. However until such a convention is finalised and implemented (which could take a while), Brussels I remains relevant to Europe and its benefits will not extend to a brexited Britain.

If and when Brexit occurs these mechanisms will be not be available in relation to enforcement in the UK. This means lack of uniformity and more uncertainty for disputing parties and their lawyers. Given that mediation clauses written today focus on managing disputes in the future, a quiet nervousness has already set in.

Mediation Fellowship for Graduate Students

There is an opportunity for a graduate student to work with PartnersGlobal on the Sustainable Mediation initiative in the Fall. It may be possible for the student to work with us on this remotely.


Position Title: Mediation Fellow

Start/End Dates: September 1 – December 1 (Dates are flexible)

Organizational Background:

PartnersGlobal (previously Partners for Democratic Change), established in 1989, is an international, non-governmental organization committed to building sustainable capacity to advance democratic institutions, civil society, and a culture of peaceful change and conflict management worldwide. PartnersGlobal specializes in organizational development and social entrepreneurship, having provided the seed capital and technical assistance to establish 18 independent, local Centers around the world.

PartnersGlobal adheres to the values of participatory decision-making, collaboration, and consensus-building as the fundamentals of an inclusive, democratic society; and, we promote the application of these skills in all aspects of our work. The PartnersGlobal team includes process experts, facilitators, and trainers who apply those collaborative skills to achieve concrete results in technical areas such as the rule of law, women’s empowerment, security sector reform, and natural resource management. Our network of local Centers is renowned for undertaking cutting edge work and applying our process expertise to convene disparate parties to jointly tackle some of the most complex development challenges.

Position Overview:

PartnersGlobal is seeking a law or graduate student to assist in the outreach and implementation of our Pathways to Sustainable Mediation project. In this project, PartnersGlobal collaborated with the JAMS Foundation to design a curriculum for sophisticated mediation promoters to go beyond strengthening the supply side of mediation, to rather focus on thinking strategically and systemically about their ability to build long-term (sustainable) mediation programs in their own contexts. The curriculum of the offered training is intended to provide a space for personal reflection and inspiration for the many committed and professional Mediation Promoters working to embed mediation and promote a culture of peaceful and efficient dispute resolution – whether at the community level, within the court system or through private/commercial mediation. The curriculum was recently piloted in Vienna for participants from 14 different European projects.

The next phase of the project is to adapt the curriculum to an on-line platform for virtual dissemination that would reach a large number of participants globally. The curriculum will serve as an educational program to provide distance coaching services for mediation promoters. The Mediation Fellow would assist in the adaptation of the curriculum to the PartnersGlobal redesigned website, as well as support the implementation of the educational program.

I. Primary Responsibilities include:

Assist in the adaptation of the curriculum to a distance coaching program residing on an online platform.
Develop and edit website content regarding the Pathways to Sustainable Mediation project.
Support the development and implementation of a monthly webinar series for senior-level mediation professionals to discuss their challenges in promoting mediation.
Liaise with international mediation professionals in order to develop and improve webinar series.
Help the technical team to promote the educational program to other international ADR donors and promoters.
II. Qualifications/Requirements:

This position requires a dynamic individual with a demonstrated ability to achieve results in a demanding and fast paced environment. Though PartnersGlobal is based in Washington, DC, there is a possibility for this fellowship to be done remotely.

  • Applicants must currently be students in a graduate program or law school.
  • Experience with mediation preferred.
  • WordPress and/or experience with updating or editing websites preferred.
  • Excellent cross-cultural/inter-personal communication skills.
  • Strong writing skills and fluency in English, written and oral.
  • Excellent critical thinking skills and judgment.
  • Independent, takes initiative.
  • Must be flexible, able to multi-task and self-directed.

To Apply: Please submit a cover letter and resume by email only to, no later than August 15, 2016. As the subject, please type: “Application: Mediation Fellowship”. No telephone calls, please.