Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Aspects Between the Nordic Countries and Austria: Court Mediation in or Out?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Future of Civil Litigation

Abstract

This chapter concerns mediation in the Nordic countries and Austria in the framework of the Mediation Directive. The main attention is directed to those in the Nordic countries that are member states of the EU and have implemented the directive, such as Finland and Sweden . The chapter also partly addresses to Denmark, although it is not bound by the Mediation Directive or subject to it. However, legislation has been made in Denmark parallel with the directive. The writing strives to throw light on the differences and similarities of mediation in the comparison countries. Austria can be seen as one of the forerunners in the field of mediation, which creates the ground for the choice of the comparison country. The Austrian Act on Mediation in Civil Matters came into force in 2004. It contains detailed regulations concerning special registration of mediators, which means that the Act lays down basic professional duties that registered mediators need to fulfil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Koulu (2011), p. 5.

  2. 2.

    Directive (2008)/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters.

  3. 3.

    The membership status of Iceland . http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/countries/detailed-country-information/iceland/index_en.htm. Accessed 18 July 2013.

  4. 4.

    Recital 30 of the Mediation Directive.

  5. 5.

    Flagstad et al. (2012), p. 74.

  6. 6.

    Government Memorandum, DS 2010:39 http://www.ud.se/sb/d/12846/a/156281. Accessed 21 July 2013.

  7. 7.

    By enacting the Act on Mediation in Certain Civil and Commercial Disputes, which entered into force on 1 August 2011 Sweden implemented the Mediation Directive (Mediation Act).

  8. 8.

    Engström and Marian (2011), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2071935. Accessed 21 July 2013. See also Swedish Justice Department, Government Proposition 2010/11:128 http://www.ud.se/sb/d/13654/a/166631. Accessed 21 July 2013.

  9. 9.

    Ficks (2012), pp. 342–344.

  10. 10.

    The Mediation Act 1(2), Lag om medling i vissa privaträttsliga tvister 1(2).SFS 2011:860.

  11. 11.

    Ficks (2012), pp. 342–343.

  12. 12.

    Government Proposition 2010/11:128, pp. 23–24.

  13. 13.

    Chapter 42, Section 17(2) of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure (2011:861).

  14. 14.

    Ficks (2012), p. 353.

  15. 15.

    Ervo and Sippel (2013), p. 410.

  16. 16.

    Ficks (2012), p. 355.

  17. 17.

    Flagstad et al. (2012), p.75, pp. 79–80.

  18. 18.

    Section 26 (595/1993):

    (1) In a case amenable to settlement the court shall endeavor to persuade the parties to settle the case.

    (2) When the court deems it expedient in order to promote a settlement, with consideration to the wishes of the parties, the nature of the case and the other circumstances, the court may also make a proposal to the parties for the amicable settlement of the case.

  19. 19.

    Koulu (2005), p. 28.

  20. 20.

    The Government Bill 284/2010, pp. 1, 15.

  21. 21.

    Ibid, pp. 1, 14.

  22. 22.

    Koulu (2005), p. 76.

  23. 23.

    Green Paper 2002, pp. 7–9, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2002/com2002_0196en01.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2013.

  24. 24.

    Ibid, p. 5.

  25. 25.

    Ibid, p. 8.

  26. 26.

    Ibid, p. 9.

  27. 27.

    Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters.

  28. 28.

    Ibid. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:136:0003:0008:En:PDF. Accessed 3 Aug 2013.

  29. 29.

    Sovitteludirektiivin täytäntöönpano 36/2010, p. 15. (The implementation of the Mediation Directive.)

  30. 30.

    Hietanen-Kunwald (2013), p. 85, Riskin (2003), p. 30.

  31. 31.

    Laki lapsen huoltoa ja tapaamisoikeutta koskevan päätöksen täytäntöönpanosta 9§.

  32. 32.

    Hietanen-Kunwald (2013), p. 74.

  33. 33.

    Article 4 of the Mediation Directive.

  34. 34.

    Sovitteludirektiivin täytäntöönpano 36/2010, p. 13. (The implementation of the Mediation Directive.)

  35. 35.

    Recital 8 of the Mediation Directive.

  36. 36.

    De Palo and Trevor (2012), p. 3.

  37. 37.

    Ibid, pp. 5–7.

  38. 38.

    Ibid, pp. 8, 10.

  39. 39.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 17.

  40. 40.

    Ervasti (2009), pp. 1076–1077.

  41. 41.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 18.

  42. 42.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 17. Die Offenlegung ihrer Intressen erfordert von den Konfligtbeteiligten ein hohes Maβ an Kooperationsbereitschaft, das nicht in jedem Konflikt gegeben sein mag. Nicht jeder Konflikti ist daher für mediative Lösungen geeignet.

  43. 43.

    Ervasti (2012), pp. 108–109.

  44. 44.

    Taivalkoski and Wallgren (2000), p. 625.

  45. 45.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 17, Falk and Koren (2005), p. 48, Frauenberger-Pfeiler (2013), p. 9. See also §1 Abs. Austrian Code of Mediation in Civil Matters. Bundesgesetz über Mediation in Zivilrechtssachen §1: (1) Mediation ist eine auf Freiwilligkeit der Parteien beruhende Tätigkeit, bei der ein fachlich ausgebildeter, neutraler Vermittler (Mediator ) mit anerkannten Methoden die Kommunikation zwischenden Parteien systematisch mit dem Ziel fördert, eine von den Parteien selbst verantwortete Lösung ihres Konfliktes zu ermöglichen.

  46. 46.

    Pohjonen (2001), p. 62.

  47. 47.

    Ervasti (2011), p. 11.

  48. 48.

    The information was obtained from the secretary of ÖBM (Österreichische Bundesverband der Mediatorinnen) Dr.jur. Barbara Günther 7 June 2011.

  49. 49.

    Article 204 of the Austrian Code of Civil Procedure.

  50. 50.

    Leon and Rohracher (2012), p. 12.

  51. 51.

    Frauenberger-Pfeiler (2013), p. 26. (204§ Austrian Code of Civil procedure Law, 29§ Austrian Law on non-contentious jurisdiction in civil cases).

  52. 52.

    Falk and Koren (2005), pp. 3, 21.

  53. 53.

    Frauenberger-Pfeiler (2013), p. 4.

  54. 54.

    Ibid, pp. 3, 5.

  55. 55.

    Leon and Rohracher (2012), p. 14.

  56. 56.

    Ibid, pp. 11–12.

  57. 57.

    Entwurf EU-MediatG, p. 8.

  58. 58.

    Bundesgesetz über bestimmte Aspekte der grentzüberschreitenden Mediation in Zivil- und Handelssachen in der Europäischen Union, EU- Mediations-Gesetz.

  59. 59.

    Leon and Rohracher (2012), p. 18.

  60. 60.

    Frauenberger-Pfeiler (2013), p. 7.

  61. 61.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 18. See also Falk and Koren (2005), pp. 66–67.

  62. 62.

    Falk and Koren (2005), p 64. See also Pruckner (2003), p. 18.

  63. 63.

    Pruckner (2003), pp. 26–27.

  64. 64.

    Ibid.

  65. 65.

    The registration preconditions for the arbitrator have been listed in §9 and §20 of the Austrian Mediation Act.

  66. 66.

    47.Verordnung des Bundesministers für Justiz über die Ausbildung zum eingetragenen Mediator (Zivilrechts-Mediations Ausbildungsverordnung-ZivMediat-AV).

  67. 67.

    From the demand that is related to the further training it is adjusted in §20 of the Austrian Mediation Act.

  68. 68.

    §21 the Austrian Mediation Act.

  69. 69.

    §14 the Austrian Mediation Act.

  70. 70.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 35.

  71. 71.

    Ibid, pp. 25, 35.

  72. 72.

    Ibid, pp. 24, 29–31.

  73. 73.

    Ibid, pp. 19–22.

  74. 74.

    http://www.wirtschaftsmediation.at/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=122:mediationsklausel&catid=44:kurzmeldungen. Accessed 14 August 2013.

  75. 75.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 52.

  76. 76.

    The determinations are included in Familienlastenausgleichsgesetz 1967 (FLAG).

  77. 77.

    Die Bezirksgerichte sind im Zivilrechtsbereich zur Entscheidung in erster Instanz für alle Rechtssachen mit einem Streitwert bis 15.000 Euro sowie (unabhängig vom Streitwert) für bestimmte Arten von Rechtssachen (insbesondere familien- und mietrechtliche Streitigkeiten) zuständig. Die Bezirksgerichte sind weiters im Strafrechtsbereich zur Entscheidung über alle Vergehen, für die eine bloße Geldstrafe oder eine Freiheitsstrafe angedroht ist, deren Höchstmaß ein Jahr nicht übersteigt, zuständig (z. B. fahrlässige Körperverletzung, Diebstahl). http://www.justiz.gv.at/internet/html/default/8ab4a8a422985de30122a924323c630f.de.html. Accessed 14 August 2013.

  78. 78.

    Pruckner (2003), p. 53.

  79. 79.

    The rules of mediation by the Finnish Bar Association, http://www.asianajajat.fi/asianajotoiminta/sovintomenettely/sovintomenettelysaannot. Accessed 6 August 2013.

  80. 80.

    Taivalkoski and Wallgren (2000), p. 626.

  81. 81.

    Ibid, pp. 629–630. See also Ervo and Sippel (2013), pp. 388–389.

  82. 82.

    The code of RIL conciliation http://www.rilsovittelu.fi/web/files/saannot.pdf. Accessed 6 Aug 2013.

  83. 83.

    Ervo and Sippel (2013), pp. 361–362.

  84. 84.

    GREEN PAPER on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law, 2002, p. 6. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2002/com2002_0196en01.pdf. Accessed 22 August 2013.

  85. 85.

    Finnish Forum for Mediation http://www.sovittelu.com/. Accessed 22 August 2013.

  86. 86.

    Leon and Rohracher (2012), pp. 17–18.

  87. 87.

    See more about the experiment in Ervo and Sippel (2013), p. 418.

  88. 88.

    Kuuliala (2012), p. 1108. The new courts were Pirkanmaan, Kanta-Hämeen, Etelä-Karjalan, Keski-Suomen, Pohjanmaan, Kemi-Tornion ja Lapin käräjäoikeudet.

  89. 89.

    Ibid.

  90. 90.

    ‘Experiences of the practical possibilities in the mediation’, Presentation in the event of the Finnish association for lawyers on 28 January 2013 by the District Court Judge Antti Savela.

  91. 91.

    Taivalkoski (2012), p. 111.

References

  • Commission of the European Communities, Green Paper on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law, Brussels, 19.04.2002. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2002/com2002_0196en01.pdf

  • De Palo G, Trevor MB (2012) Introduction. In: De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) EU mediation law and practice, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:136:0003:0008:En:PDF

  • Engström D, Marian C (2011) Striking the hard bargain: the implementation of the EU mediation directive in Sweden . International Bar Association, Mediation Newsletter. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2071935

  • Entwurf eines Bundesgesetzes über bestimmte Aspekte der grenzüberschreitenden Mediation in Zivil- und Handelssachen in der Europäischen Union (EU-MediatG)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervasti K (2009) Kohti sovintoratkaisuja ja pragmaattisia kompromisseja. Lakimies 7-8/2009, pp 1071–1093

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervasti K (2011) Tuomioistuinsovittelu Suomessa, oikeuspoliittisen tutkimuslaitoksen tutkimuksia 256, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervasti K (2012) Konfliktidiagnoosi osana konfliktihallintaa. Defensor Legis N:o 1/2012, pp 104–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervo L, Sippel L (2013) Scandinavian countries. In: Esplugues C, Iglesias J, Palao G (eds) Civil and commercial mediation in Europe – national mediation rules and procedures, vol I. Intersentia, Cambridge, pp 371–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk G, Koren G (2005) Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz Kommentar zum ZivMediatG. Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Ficks E (2012) Sweden . In: De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) EU mediation law and practice, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 341–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Flagstad M, Monberg T, Pedersen KC (2012) Denmark. In: De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) EU mediation law and practice, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 73–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauenberger-Pfeiler U (2013) Austria. In: Esplugues C, Iglesias J, Palao G (eds) Civil and commercial mediation in Europe – national mediation rules and procedures, vol I. Intersentia, Cambridge, pp 1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Proposition 2010/11:128 ‘Mediation and conciliation – increased opportunities to agree, 14 April 2011, Regeringens proposition 2010/11:128 Medling och förlikning – ökade möjligheter att komma överens. http://www.ud.se/sb/d/13654/a/166631. Accessed 21 July 2013

  • Government Memorandum, Medling i vissa privaträttsliga frÃ¥gor. DS 2010:39. http://www.ud.se/sb/d/12846/a/156281. Accessed 21 July 2013

  • Hietanen-Kunwald P (2013) Sovittelun oikeudellistuminen – Eurooppalaisen sovitteludirektiivin sovittelukäsite (Change of the mediation to judicial. Mediation concept of the European mediation directive). Oikeus 1:71–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Koulu R (2005) Mitä vaihtoehtoja vaihtoehtoisen riidanratkaisun tutkimukselle? In: Lindfors H (ed) Vaihtoehtoista riidanratkaisua vai vaihtoehtoista konfliktinratkaisua? Saarijärvi, pp 27–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Koulu R (2011) Yksityiset lautakunnat riidanratkaisijoina. Lakimiesliiton kustannus, Hämeenlinna

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuuliala M (2012) ‘Sovinto tuomioistuimessa – oikotie riidan ratkaisuun? Lakimies 7-8/2012, p 1108 (Settlement in the court-shortcut to dispute resolution)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leon C, Rohracher I (2012) In: De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) EU mediation law and practice, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 11–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohjonen S (2001) Konfliktien ratkaisu oikeusjärjestelmässä ja inhimillisessä vuorovaikutuksessa. In: Pohjonen S (ed) Sovittelu ja muut vaihtoehtoiset konfliktinratkaisumenetelmät, Vantaa

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruckner M (2003) Recht der mediation . Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskin (2003) Decision making in mediation: the new old grid and the new grid system. Notre Dame Law Rev 79:1–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Sovitteludirektiivin täytäntöönpano, Oikeusministeriön mietintöjä ja lausuntoja 36/2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Taivalkoski P (2012) Finland . In: De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) EU mediation law and practice, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 107–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Taivalkoski P, Wallgren C (2000) Asianajajan eettiset säännöt ja sovintomenettely. Defensor Legis N:o 4/2000, pp 625–63

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland

    Liisa Sippel

Authors
  1. Liisa Sippel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liisa Sippel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. JPS, University of Örebro, Örebro, Sweden

    Laura Ervo

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway

    Anna Nylund

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sippel, L. (2014). Comparative Aspects Between the Nordic Countries and Austria: Court Mediation in or Out?. In: Ervo, L., Nylund, A. (eds) The Future of Civil Litigation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04465-1_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation