Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Court-Connected Mediation in Danish Civil Justice: A Happy Marriage of a Strained Relationship

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Future of Civil Litigation

Abstract

The chapter is about court-connected mediation in Denmark. It opens with a historical review of mediation activities in legal disputes with special attention to conciliation boards operating from 1795 to 1952. It goes on to describe the contemporary system of court-connected mediation with a review of the regulation, as well as the practice of mediation in this setting. The chapter goes on to examine the current status of court-connected mediation, demonstrating that there seems to be enthusiasm, as well inherent ambivalence in the legal community towards this method of dispute resolution. Finally, the future role of court-connected mediation in civil litigation is addressed, concluding that it is not yet possible to determine whether court-connected mediation is on the rise or whether it is just a temporary feature of the civil justice system.

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.

    Andersen (2010), pp. 60 and 80.

  2. 2.

    Andersen (2010), p. 17.

  3. 3.

    Andersen (2010), p. 109.

  4. 4.

    Norway was part of Denmark at the time, and the resolution included towns in Norway. By a resolution in 1797, rural Norway was included as well.

  5. 5.

    For a more detailed account of the history of the conciliation boards, see Vindeløv (1997).

  6. 6.

    10. juli 1795 Fr. om Forligelses-Commissioners Stiftelse overalt i Danmark, samt i Købstæderne i Norge.

  7. 7.

    For a discussion of their status as part of the administration or the judiciary, see Adrian (2012), p. 38f., and Vindeløv (1997), p. 87.

  8. 8.

    Anette Jensen, The Danish National Archives, mail 6/7/2011.

  9. 9.

    Rothe (1803), p. 58ff.

  10. 10.

    If the disagreement turned out to be about matters where statements from witnesses were necessary, the case was referred to court to obtain these and afterwards referred back to the conciliation commissions. Most likely, this only rarely happened.

  11. 11.

    Dombernowsky (1985).

  12. 12.

    See Dombernowsky (1985), pp. 140, 145 and 161f.; for the opposite, see p. 178ff.

  13. 13.

    For the concepts evaluative/facilitative, see Riskin (1996, 2003–2004).

  14. 14.

    This activity is called forligsmægling, whereas court-connected mediation is called retsmægling.

  15. 15.

    For a detailed account of the emergence of court-connected mediation in Denmark, see Adrian (2012), p. 43ff.

  16. 16.

    For an account of court-connected mediation in Norway, see Anna Nylund’s chapter elsewhere in the book.

  17. 17.

    See the introduction of proposal for legislation on court-connected mediation, Lovforslag nr. 17 af 28. November 2007 om ændring af retsplejeloven, lov om retsafgifter og arveloven (Retsmægling mv.).

  18. 18.

    Report (Betænkning) no 1481/2005 on Court-Connected Mediation , p. 14.

  19. 19.

    See 1. behandling af L 17 Forslag til lov om ændring af retsplejeloven, lov om retsafgifter og arveloven (Retsmægling m.v.), 13. December 2007, FT 2007–2008 (2. samling).

  20. 20.

    Etiske regler for retsmægling, Domstolsstyrelsen (2012). (http://www.domstol.dk/saadangoerdu/retsmaegling/Pages/Etiskeretningslinjerforretsmaegling.aspx).

  21. 21.

    Matters that the parties cannot dispose of, like for example divorce, are exempt.

  22. 22.

    This is in line with the Administration of Justice Committee’s recommendation; see Report no 1481/2005 on Court-Connected Mediation , p. 156.

  23. 23.

    Report no 1481/2005 on Court-Connected Mediation , p. 134.

  24. 24.

    The issue of who could be mediators was rather disputed prior to the implementation of court-connected mediation in 2008. For this discussion, see Report no 1481/2005 on Court-Connected Mediation , p. 143ff.

  25. 25.

    According to statistical information provided by mail from the Danish Court Administration 12 August 2011 and 30 August 2013.

  26. 26.

    See the evaluation of the pilot project, Roepstorff and Kyvsgaard (2005), pp. 23, and Adrian (2012), p. 156.

  27. 27.

    Adrian (2012), p. 165.

  28. 28.

    De Palo and Trevor (2012), Introduction.

  29. 29.

    For a review of the different types of regulation in Denmark and their hierarchy, see Blume (2011).

  30. 30.

    Report no 1481/2005 on Court-Connected Mediation , p. 134.

  31. 31.

    See, inter alia, Dalberg-Larsen (2009), p. 72f.

  32. 32.

    Pound (1910).

  33. 33.

    For a full account of the study, see Adrian (2012). Generally, there are few observational studies of mediation, and this study is the only one of its kind in Denmark so far. The other comprehensive investigation into court-connected mediation in Denmark is an evaluation of the pilot project based on statistical information, surveys and interviews; see Roepstorff and Kyvsgaard (2005).

  34. 34.

    See chap. 5 in Adrian (2012) for a detailed account of the methodology of the study and the data.

  35. 35.

    These cases are different from other civil cases in so many ways that an adequate study of them was impossible within the scope of the study.

  36. 36.

    This corresponds with the results of the evaluation study of the pilot project where 44 % of the participating attorneys and 63 % of the mediators found that the parties to a fair or high degree came to agreements that could not have been achieved in a ruling; see Roepstorff and Kyvsgaard (2005), p. 76.

  37. 37.

    The others are American. In a study of 50 legal cases with parties who had a prior relationship, Golann (2002) found that in 63 % of the cases the agreements included either a relationship repair (22 %) or other integrative results (41 %). Wissler (2002) found that 82 % of the agreements contained monetary elements only and 18 % of the agreement with monetary elements in combination with other elements or other elements alone, and McEwen and Maiman (1981) found that only 12 % of agreements in small claims mediation contained conditions other than payment.

  38. 38.

    Mykland et al. (2009) and Ervasti (2011).

  39. 39.

    Interests are understood as the motives underlying positions (demands) and needs as recognizable and universal needs underlying positions and interests; see Adrian (2012), p. 135. For interests and needs in general, see Fisher et al. (1999).

  40. 40.

    For the different phases, see Adrian (2012) and Vindeløv (2012).

  41. 41.

    This seems to be a more encompassing concept than Mnookin and Kornhauser’s (1978–1979) idea of mediation taking place in the shadow of the law or Riskin and Welsh’s (2008) notion of mediation taking place in the shadow of the courthouse.

  42. 42.

    This is supported by a host of international studies. For studies in Scandinavia, see evaluation reports on the Danish and Norwegian pilot projects, Roepstorff and Kyvsgaard (2005) and Knoff (2001).

  43. 43.

    For ownership of conflict, see Christie (1977).

  44. 44.

    Hollander-Blumoff and Tyler (2011), p. 3, and Adrian (2013), p. 108.

  45. 45.

    Hollander-Blumoff and Tyler (2011), p. 5f., and Adrian (2013), p. 108f.

  46. 46.

    Meares et al. (2012), p. 8f.

  47. 47.

    See http://www.domstol.dk/om/talogfakta/statistik/Pages/default.aspx.

  48. 48.

    Annual accounts (embedsregnskaber) from the two high courts, Østre Landsret and Vestre Landsret, 2009–2012, and mails from the Danish Court Administration, 12 August and 29 August 2013.

  49. 49.

    http://www.domstol.dk/om/talogfakta/statistik/Pages/civilesager.aspx.

  50. 50.

    Due to the lack of adequate information, there is considerable uncertainty with regard to settlement rates, but various statistics and reports suggest it is between 50 and 63 %. There is nothing that suggests substantial variations from year to year.

  51. 51.

    The numbers about the lawyer mediators are provided by the chairman of the board for the Danish Mediation Institute by mail, September 5, 2013.

  52. 52.

    Until 2010 called Danmarks Domstole (the Courts of Denmark).

  53. 53.

    Regarding target group, see Retten Rundt nr. 13, marts 2013, p. 2.

  54. 54.

    Regarding target group, see the magazine’s website: http://www.advokatsamfundet.dk/Service/Publikationer/Medlemsbladet%20Advokaten.aspx.

  55. 55.

    Danmarks Domstole nr. 21, 2004, p. 19.

  56. 56.

    Danmarks Domstole nr. 25, 2004, p. 12.

  57. 57.

    Danmarks Domstole nr. 29, 2005, p. 6.

  58. 58.

    Retten Rundt nr. 1, 2010, p. 10.

  59. 59.

    Advokaten nr. 4, 2003. (http://www.advokatsamfundet.dk/Service/Publikationer/Tidligere%20artikler/2003/Advokaten%204/Mr%20Mediator%20vil%20glaede%20begge%20parter%20i%20en%20konflikt.aspx).

  60. 60.

    A group of family lawyers were trained as mediators as early as 1996/1997, and in 2002 they were instrumental in providing mediation in family matters on an experimental basis in the Copenhagen Municipal Court.

  61. 61.

    Advokaten nr. 5, 2003. (http://www.advokatsamfundet.dk/Service/Publikationer/Tidligere%20artikler/2003/Advokaten%205/Konfliktloesning.aspx).

  62. 62.

    Advokaten 1, 2013, p. 36.

  63. 63.

    Danmarks Domstole nr. 6, 2001, p. 4.

  64. 64.

    http://www.domstol.dk/om/maalogvaerdier/vision/Pages/default.aspx.

  65. 65.

    For the past 10 years, I have conducted a number of mediation trainings of judges, made presentations at local courts, interviewed court-connected mediators and had numerous informal conversations with judges, judge mediators and other court personnel. It is based on my impressions from these settings, coupled with written material, that I make these observations.

  66. 66.

    For an English version of the ethical guidelines in full, see Jørgensen and Lavesen (2011), pp. 307.

  67. 67.

    Roepstorff and Kyvsgaard (2005), pp. 29 and 32.

  68. 68.

    Unpublished data from the study on court-connected mediation that Adrian (2012) is based on.

  69. 69.

    For the different paradigms, see Vindeløv (2012), p. 37ff.

  70. 70.

    See Vindeløv (2012), p. 345.

  71. 71.

    See for example Kovach and Love (1998), p. 90ff.

References

  • Adrian L (2013) Procesretfærdighed - det er også måden, der tæller. Juristen 3:107–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Adrian L (2012) Mellem retssag og rundbordssamtale: Retsmægling i teori og praksis. Jurist-og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen P (2010) Studier i dansk proceshistorie: Tiden indtil Danske Lov 1683. Jurist-og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume P (2011) Legal method in Danish law. Djøf Publishing, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie N (1977) Conflicts as property. Br J Criminol 17:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalberg-Larsen J (2009) Mægling, ret og samfund – Perspektiver på mægling. Jurist-og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • De Palo G, Trevor MB (eds) (2012) EU mediation: law and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombernowsky L (1985) “Slagsmaale ere nu om Stunder langt sjældnere…” – retsopfattelse og adfærd hos fynsk landalmue omkring år 1800. Landbohistorisk selskab, Odense

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervasti K (2011) Utveckningslinjer för rättsmedling i Finland. JFT 3:267–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R, Ury W, Patton B (1999) Getting to yes: negotiating an agreement without giving in. Random House, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Golann D (2002) Is legal mediation a process of repair-or separation? An empirical study, and its implications. Harv Negot Law Rev 7:301–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander-Blumoff R, Tyler T (2011) Procedural justice and the rule of law: fostering legitimacy in alternative dispute resolution. J Disp Resol 1:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen LØ, Lavesen M (2011) De advokatetiske regler. Advokatsamfundet, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoff RH (2001) Raskere? Billigere? Vennligere? – Evaluering af prøveordning med rettsmekling. Rapport for Justisdepartementet

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovach KK, Love LP (1998) Mapping mediation: the risks of Riskin’s grid. Harv Negot Law Rev 3:71–110

    Google Scholar 

  • McEwen CA, Maiman RJ (1981) Small claims mediation in Maine: an empirical assessment. Me Law Rev 33:237–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Meares TL, Tyler T, Gardener J (2012) Lawful or fair? How cops and laypeople view good policing. Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 255. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2116645 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2116645

  • Mnookin RH, Kornhauser L (1978–1979) Bargaining in the shadow of the law: the case of divorce. Yale Law J 88:950–997

    Google Scholar 

  • Mykland S, Rognes J, Sky PK, Hoddevik CL, Laskemoen LM (2009) Et studie av rettsforlik i norske tingsretter – om konflikttransformation i rettsmeklingsprosessen. Kart og Plan 69:237–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Pound R (1910) Law in books law in action. Am Law Rev 44:12–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskin LL (1996) Understanding mediators’ orientations, strategies, and techniques: a grid for the perplexed. Harv Negot Law Rev 1:7–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskin LL (2003–2004) Decisionmaking in mediation: the new old grid and the new grid system. Notre Dame Law Rev 1:1–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskin LL, Welsh NA (2008) Is that all there is?: “The problem” in court-oriented mediation. Geo Mason Law Rev 15:863–932

    Google Scholar 

  • Roepstorff J, Kyvsgaard B (2005) Forsøg med retsmægling – en evalueringsrapport. Justitsministeriets Forskningsenhed, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothe AB (1803) Efterretning om Forligelseskommissioners Oprindelse og Indretning i den Danske Stat. Math. Joh. Sebbelow, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Vindeløv V (1997) Konflikt, tvist og mægling - konfliktløsning ved forhandling. Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Vindeløv V (2012) Reflexive mediation – with a sustainable perspective. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Wissler RL (2002) Court-connected mediation in general civil cases: what we know from empirical research. Ohio St J Disp Resol 17:641–704

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Law Faculty, University of Copenhagen, Studiestraede 6, 1455, Copenhagen K, Denmark

    Lin Adrian

Authors
  1. Lin Adrian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lin Adrian .

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

Adrian, L. (2014). Court-Connected Mediation in Danish Civil Justice: A Happy Marriage of a Strained Relationship. In: Ervo, L., Nylund, A. (eds) The Future of Civil Litigation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04465-1_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation