General Report: New Developments in Civil and Commercial Mediation – Global Comparative Perspectives

Esplugues, Carlos

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-18135-6_1

Carlos Esplugues LLM (Harvard), MSc (Edinburgh)⁵

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 6))

1976 Accesses
3 Citations

Abstract

Modern societies are very much linked to the idea of litigation. The incessant increase in the level of litigation puts the whole judicial system under pressure because the volume of disputes brought before State courts increases, the proceedings become more and more lengthy and the costs incurred by the parties in such proceedings also greatly increase. This situation can impair the full implementation of the principle of access to justice for citizens.

In an attempt to tackle this phenomenon, support for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) tools has increased in recent decades in many parts of the world. Devices – like mediation – are said not to be any longer an “alternative” to litigation but are increasingly becoming integrated part of national schemes of justice. In fact, a new system of justice understood “in a broad sense” is being developed in many parts of the world.

Nowadays, mediation is said to occupy a very important position within this broad concept. It is firmly established in many legal systems and is growingly accepted in others. It is approached as a flexible and easily tailored way for parties to work out solutions to their disputes in many different fields, favoring the continuance of their relationships at the same time.

Mediation is growingly accepted in many places of the world and it is more and more present on the legal agenda of many States. But at the same time too many important differences exist worldwide not only in relation to the legal framework developed, its scope and solutions provided, but also regarding the commitment to the institution by national governments and its real use by citizens.

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)

eBook: USD 219.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 279.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 279.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Décret n° 2007–1253 modifiant le décret du 17.11.1999 relatif aux maisons de justice, à la médiation et à la conciliation.
2.
A survey of the use of ADR in the EU has been developed by DG SANCO (DG Sanco 2009). The study refers to the existence of some 750 different ADR schemes in the EU involving Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation or a mixture of any of them (11 ff.). Additionally, a yearly increase in the use of ADR devices in Europe is said to be ascertainable: “The number of ADR cases in the EU has increased throughout the last years. For 2006, about 410,000 cases were reported, for 2007 about 473,000 cases, and the estimated minimum number of individual ADR cases in the EU in 2008 was approximately 530,000. This trend is confirmed when analyzing data from large ADR schemes and national decentralized ADR systems for which data is collected at central level.” (8).
3.
Conciliation in the framework of a civil procedure is accepted in Arts. 428 & 555(2) CPC.
4.
Only some isolated rules on consumer protection and the Mediator of the Republic, which is not a proper mediator, are designed.
5.
Although 3 different Draft Bill have been registered by the Supreme Court −2010, 2011 and 2012-.
6.
Statistics for Spain are available at: http://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Temas/Estadistica_Judicial/Analisis_estadistico/La_Justicia_dato_a_dato/La_justicia_dato_a_dato___ano_2012, accessed 09.07.2014.
7.
“There are circa 2,470 registered mediators, including ca. 470 in juvenile matters, above 800 in civil cases; above 1,100 in criminal cases, ca. 280 in labour cases, ca. 410 in commercial disputes and ca. 560 in family matters…. There exist ca. 50 Mediation Centres” (Jankowski et al. 2014, 3–4).
8.
Ley No 708 de Arbitraje y Conciliación of 2015.
9.
Ley de Conciliación (Extrajudicial) 26872 of 1997.
10.
Decree No. 161–2000, Ley de Conciliación y Arbitraje of 2000.
11.
For instance, as regards Mexico DF, note Art. 2(X) Alternative Justice Law of the Mexico City High Court of Justice and the Alternative Justice Law of the Mexico City High Court of Justice, the CPC of the City of Mexico, the CrimPC of the City of Mexico or the Juvenile Justice Law for the City of Mexico.
12.
Some of these arguments are even present in the Explanatory notes of some of the modern Mediation Acts in Europe. For instance, Spain or the Czech Republic.
13.
Recital 5 2008 Directive on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters clearly states that the “objective of ensuring better access to justice, … , should encompass access to judicial as well as extrajudicial dispute resolution methods”.
14.
Reference is made to Art. 1134 Cc as the basis for mediation.
15.
This is done by way of the ratification of the Washington Convention of 18.3.1965.
16.
Arts. 31 & 175(5) CPC.
17.
Art. 372 CPC.
18.
Décret n° 2006–417 du 25.8.2006 portant création, attributions, organisation et fonctionnement de l’Organe Présidentiel de Médiation.
19.
“1.3. For the purposes of this Law, “conciliation” means a process, whether referred to by the expression conciliation, mediation or an expression of similar import, whereby parties request a third person or persons (“the conciliator”) to assist them in their attempt to reach an amicable settlement of their dispute arising out of or relating to a contractual or other legal relationship. The conciliator does not have the authority to impose upon the parties a solution to the dispute.”
20.
Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21.5.2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters, Official Journal of the European Union (OJ) L 136, of 24.5.2008 (2008 Directive).
21.
Art. 3(b) 2008 Directive correlatively states that “mediator” means, “any third person who is asked to conduct a mediation in an effective, impartial and competent way, regardless of the denomination or profession of that third person in the Member State concerned and of the way in which the third person has been appointed or requested to conduct the mediation.” Art. 3(a)(II) 2008 Directive explicitly accepts judges to act as mediators in those cases they are “not responsible for any judicial proceedings concerning the dispute in question”.
22.
I.e.: in USA, S. (2)(1) UMA states that ‘“Mediation” means a process in which a mediator facilitates communication and negotiation between parties to assist them in reaching a voluntary agreement regarding their dispute,’ Available at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/umafinalstyled.cfm, accessed 15.07.2014.
23.
S. (2)(2) UMA defines mediator as “…an individual who conducts a mediation.”
24.
Rule 73 of the Mediation Rules defines “mediation” as: “the process by which a mediator assists the parties in actual or potential to litigation to resolve the dispute between them by facilitating discussions between the parties, by assisting them in identifying issues, clarifying priorities, exploring areas of compromise and generating options in an attempt to solve the dispute”.
25.
Art. 2 MA.
26.
Art. 2 MA.
27.
§1 Abs. 1 ACMC; §2 Abs. 1 z. 1 CEUM.
28.
Arts. 2, 5 or 10(2) MA.
29.
Art. 1(1) MA. Also the parties are allowed to withdraw from the mediation at any stage of the procedure, in accordance to Art. 2(5) MA.
30.
Art. 1251-2(1) NCPC.
31.
Art. 3 MA that reproduces the solution provided by the Directive of 2008, Art. 3(a), Recitals 11 and 12.
32.
Arts 1 & 6(1) MA.
33.
S. 18(1) MA.
34.
Arts. 1, 2 & 60(1) Act 193/2006 on Mediation.
35.
Arts. 2(1) & 7(5) MA.
36.
Art. 3 MA.
37.
Art. 6(3) MA. This idea of voluntariness is stressed by Art. 19(1) MA which establishes that mediation starts with the so called “constitutive session” –“sesión constitutiva”- in which the parties must firstly manifest their wish to “develop a mediation procedure”.
38.
Art. 3(1)(a) MA.
39.
As regards Scotland, note The Gill Report (2009b) (Vol. II), Recommendation 96 which actually considers mandatory schemes contrary to “the constitutional right of the citizen to take a dispute to the courts of law”.
40.
And in Art. 4 of Law n. 21/2007, of 12.6.2007 concerning Criminal Mediation.
41.
The provision defines mediation as the: “activity, irrespective of how it is denominated, developed by a third impartial person and which finalizes with the object of assisting two or more persons as regards the search of an amicable agreement for a dispute, or by the drafting of a proposal for its solution”.
42.
Recital 13, 2008 Directive. Consider that modern communications technologies are available for the parties to organize their procedure (Recital 9, 2008 Directive).
43.
Art. 5(1) 2008 Directive. The court may also invite the parties “to attend an information sesion on the use of mediation if such sessions are held and are easily available” (Art. 5(1) in fine).
44.
Art. 5(2) & Recital 14, 2008 Directive.
45.
Note Decree Law of 21.6.2013, no. 69 transposed and amended by the Act of 9.8.2013, no. 98.
46.
Or Slovenia, too, where subject to the decision of the judge a court-annexed compulsory system is adopted.
47.
Halsey v. Milton Keynes Gen. Hosp., [2004] EWCA (Civ) 576, [2004] W.L.R. 3002, [13] (Eng.).
48.
Case C-492/11 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di Pace di Mercato San Severino (Italy) lodged on 26.09.2011 — Ciro Di Donna v Società imballaggi metallici Salerno Srl (SIMSA), OJ C 340, of 19.11.2011, 10.
49.
See ordinanza del TAR Lazio, 12.4.2011; Trib. Parma, 1.8. 2011; Trib. Genova, 18.11.2011; Trib. Palermo, 30.12. 2011, in (2011) 39 Guida al Diritto, 34.
50.
[2010], ECR p. I-00213.
51.
GURI, No. 49, of 12.12.2012.
52.
§15a EGZPO, referring to certain aspects of small civil law disputes, permits mandatory pre-trial mediation. Only when this mandatory mediation is completed may a dispute be brought before a court. Is this requirement not fulfilled it will be dismissed by the court. In case no agreement is reached, parties may commence a suit before a court.
53.
Currently eleven out of sixteen Länder have made use of this possibility.
54.
Art. 60(1)(g) of this rule now embodies a change regarding criminal matters. Mediation is accepted in the case of crimes for which the penal action is set in motion on a prior petition of the injured Party and Parties’ reconciliation removes the penal liability, after the petition filing, if the doer is known or was identified, on the condition that the victim expresses his/her consent of participating in the information session together with the doer. Doubts as to whether this preliminary session is compulsory also as regards criminal matters seem to exist.
55.
S. 17(c) MA accepts resource to mediation by the parties “by law”.
56.
Arts. 269–273 Labour Act.
57.
Arts. 44–52 Family Act.
58.
SS. 59 & 61 The Children Act.
59.
Art. 238 Cc.
60.
Art. 181 ff. Code de la famille.
61.
Arts. 270–272 Cc.
62.
Art. 243 ff. CTravail.
63.
Arts. 236 & 239 Loi n° 2002–07 portant code des personnes et de la famille.
64.
Art. 12 of the Acte uniforme portant organisation des procédures simplifiées de recouvrement et des voies d’exécution of the Organisation pour l’harmonisation en Afrique du droit des affaires (OHADA).
65.
Cameroun, Art. 139 CTravail; Centro African Republic, Art. 346 CTravail; Congo, Art. 240 CTravail; Gabon, Art. 314 CTravail; Tchad, Art. 420 CTravail.
66.
Cameroun, Art. 158 CTravail; Centro Africa Republic, Art. 367 CTravail; Congo, Art. 242 CTravail; Gabon, Art. 359 CTravail; Tchad, Art. 443 CTravail.
67.
Art. 26 (1) Loi fixant les incitations à l’investissement privé en République du Cameroun.
68.
Art. 64 Loi n° 009/PR/98 portant sur les télécommunications au Tchad.
69.
Art. 136 Loi n° 005/2001 portant réglementation des télécommunications au Gabon.
70.
Art. 85 Loi n° 2011/22 of 14.12.2011 régissant le secteur de l’électricité au Cameroun.
71.
Arrêté ministériel n° 02256 of 2.3.2009.
72.
Note, Tribunal de grande instance de Ouagadougou, jugement n° 74, 19.2.2003, affaire Kiemtoré T Hervé c/ L’Entreprise Application Peinture Générale, available at: www.ohada.com, Ohadata J-04-248 (accessed 07.07.2014).
73.
2010 (3) SA 220 (GSJ), available at: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2009/76.html, accessed 08.07.2014.
74.
2011 2 All SA 299 (SCA), available at: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2010/139.html, accessed 08.07.2014.
75.
38 of 2005.
76.
Which seems to be not exactly the same as court-annexed mediation in so far mediation takes place at the courtyard buy prior the initiation of a civil procedure.
77.
Note The Gill Report (2009a), Vol. I, Chapter 5, paragraph (par). 83 and Chapter 7 paragraphs (pars. 2–8).
78.
In fact Ireland is approached as having a high rate of litigiousness and the world’s highest rate of lawyers per capita.
79.
A good example as regards the position of courts in favour of mediation is the case of Charlton v Kenn (The High Court Record No. 2006/4266P) as regards a small piece of land next to the house of two neighbours. Another recent case is, Six Mile Investments [Unlimited] & Ors -V- Companies Acts 1963 to 2001 No. 2012/63 COS (Referred by Aylmer 2012, 13). Mediation is governed by the general rules on contracts and by the fundamental principles of voluntariness, confidentiality, privilege attaching to without prejudice communications occurring during or in contemplation of litigation, self-determination, neutrality, impartiality and enforceability.
80.
Law no 562, of 3.12.2009, on conciliation procedure (Lepitusseadus).
81.
Also, Art. 209(2) concerning categories of Courts.
82.
Arts. 117 & 118.
83.
Note Art. 277 CPC as regards courts dealing with small claims –“Juizados Especiais”- consider Law no. 9099/95 and Decree 1572/1995 in relation to labor law related mediation. The Council of National Justice has also enacted Resolution No. 125/1210, in particular Annex III that provides that every National Court will have to offer an adequate structure to make available for the parties the possibility of resort to conciliation previously to entering in judicial litigation. This possibility is said not to have been accomplished yet.
84.
MA, Additional Provisions §1.
85.
Art. 1251–4 NCPC.
86.
Note Art. 1(2) in fine MA.
87.
Art. 2(1) Act no. 420/2004.
88.
Reference to “social” disputes is also included.
89.
Art. 1(1) MA.
90.
In fact, as previously stated, V. TILMAN clearly states that the percentage of disputes referred to mediation by businesses is said to range from 0,5 % till 2 % of the total amount. The situation as regards cross-border disputes is even worse: mediation stands in these cases for less than 0,05 % of European business conflicts. These dramatic figures reach an additional dimension if we take into account that around 25 % of commercial disputes in Europe are left unsolved because citizens refuse to litigate. (Tilman 2011, 4).
91.
Art. 2(1) Act no. 420/2004.
92.
Reference to “social” disputes is also included.
93.
Art. 1(1) MA.
94.
Art. 2(5) Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
95.
Art. 2(1) Legislative Decree n°. 28/2010.
96.
Art. 1251–1 (1) NCPC.
97.
Art. 11.° Act No. 29/2013.
98.
Where disputes relating to rights concerning the protection of personality cannot be referred to mediation either.
99.
Art. 158(1)(2) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
100.
Loi n°98-004 of 27.1.1998 portant Code du travail en République du Bénin and Art. 803 Loi n° 2008–07 of 28.2.2011 portant Code de procédure civile, commerciale, administrative, sociale et des comptes.
101.
Art. 1 Loi n° 2009–22 of 11.8.2009 instituant le Médiateur de la République.
102.
Arts. 86(d), 410–412, 541, 799, 895 Code général des impôts 365 du Code général des impôts.
103.
Art. 86 Loi n° 2005–30 of 5.4.2006 relative à la protection du droit d’auteur et des droits voisins en République du Bénin.
104.
Loi n° 2002–07 of 14.6.2004 portant Code des personnes et de la famille.
105.
Loi GELOSE (Gestion Locale Sécurisée) Loi 96–025 of 30.9.1996.
106.
Art. 9(3) Loi 2007–036 of 14.1.2008 qui prévoit la médiation de l’EDBM (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF MADAGASCAR) dans le cadre d’un litige entre Etat et investisseurs étrangers.
107.
Arts. 200–207 Loi 2003–044 of 28.7. 2004 relative au Code du Travail.
108.
Decreto Legislativo of 28.8.2000, no. 274, Disposizioni sulla competenza penale del giudice di pace, a norma dell’articolo 14 della legge 24.11.1999, n. 468.
109.
Act of 6.6.1997 – Code of Criminal Procedure and in 2002 in proceedings concerning juvenile criminals (Act of 26.10.2002 on the Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings). Note also the Ordinance of the Minister of Justice of 13.6.2003 on mediation proceedings in criminal cases.
110.
Criminal mediation is governed by Act n. 550/2003 Coll, on probation and mediation officers as amended.
111.
S. 71a The Criminal Procedure Act.
112.
Art. 6(2) MA.
113.
Art. 6 MA.
114.
Arts. 2638 – 2642 Cc. These rules will govern its form and content.
115.
Arts. 1251–5 (1) & 1251–8 NCPC.
116.
P. 7(2) MA.
117.
Art. 183⁷ k.p.c.
118.
S. 7–1 The Dispute Act. Mediations developed under the rules of this Chapter grant the parties a higher level of rights than those developed outside it.
119.
Art. 2(7) MA.
120.
Art. 2 MA.
121.
Under § 145 et seq. BGB, an agreement to mediate is concluded by offer and acceptance.
122.
Art. 1251.9(2) NCPC where the content of the agreement to mediate is clearly stated: “(2) L’accord en vue de la médiation contient: (1) l’accord des parties de recourir à la médiation; (2) le nom et l’adresse des parties et de leurs conseils; (3) le nom, la qualité et l’adresse du médiateur, et le cas échéant, la mention que le médiateur est agréé par le ministre de la Justice; (4) un exposé succinct du différend; (5) les modalités d’organisation et la durée du processus; (6) le rappel du principe de la confidentialité des communications et pièces échangées dans le cours de la médiation; (7) le mode de fixation et le taux des honoraires du médiateur, ainsi que les modalités de leur paiement; (8) la date et le lieu de signature; et (9) la signature des parties et du médiateur.”
123.
Art. 1251–9 (2) (6) NCPC.
124.
Note, Art. 1251–23 NCPC.
125.
Art. 2 MA
126.
The MA only states that should one party receive an invitation to mediate and does not reply to it in the next 15 days, the invitation will be deemed refused (Art. 6 (3)).
127.
Under § § 145 et seq. BGB, an agreement to mediate is concluded by offer and acceptance.
128.
Code of Conduct, Art. 3.1. Remember Art. 2MA of the Mediation Act which also states that the agreement must be evidenced in writing.
129.
Art. 8 MA.
130.
Art. 1251-9(2) NCPC.
131.
Art. 14(2) MA.
132.
Art. 1251-9(2) NCPC.
133.
This solution is said to be reached by way of taking into account the existing French’s case law regarding conciliation.
134.
Croatia is a good example of this situation, note Art. 18 MA in which it is clearly stated that the court or the arbitration shall reject any notion to start or continue a procedure or arbitration.
135.
Art. 1731 CPC.
136.
Art. 6(2) MA.
137.
Its breach may render the parties responsible for breach of contract and some penalties are seemingly foreseen (As per Art, 17(2) & (3) MA).
138.
[2002] 2 All ER (Comm) 1041, Colman J. N. A somewhat more negative attitude towards the real enforceability of mediation clauses may be found in SITA v Watson Wyatt: Maxwell Batley [2002] EWHC Ch 2025 and in Corenso Ltd v The Burden Group plc. [2003] EWHC 1805 (QB).
139.
[2011] EWHC 668 (QB), Slade J.
140.
Art. 183¹ § 1 k.p.c. clearly states that “Mediation is voluntary.”
141.
LJNAU3724, available (in Dutch) at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AU3724 (visited 24.06.2014).
142.
Note 5.1.4. infra.
143.
Art. 33.° Law n. 78/2001, 13.7.2001 – a minor change has been operated by Law 54/2013, of 31.7, and Art. 19 Decree of Ministry of Justice n. 1112/2005, of 28.10.2005 (Justice for the Peace mediation services); Art. 9 Decree of Secretary of State of Justice n. 18778/2007, of 13.7.2007 (family mediation services); Art. 5 Agreement between Ministry of Justice, Labour Unions and Industry Associations, of 5.5.2006 (labour mediation services); Art. 12 and 18 Regulation of Criminal Mediation System, approved by Decree of Ministry of Justice n. 68-C/2008, of 22.1.2008 (criminal mediation services).
144.
Arts. 151.14 – 151.23 CPC.
145.
Art. 20(2) MA.
146.
Art. 399 CPC.
147.
Art. 9(2) CPC.
148.
Art. 60 CPC.
149.
Art. 122, Act No. 19–99 portant organizatoin judiciaire au Congo.
150.
Art. 3 CPC.
151.
R. 183 Rules Board for Courts of Law Act (107/1985): Amendment of Rules Regulating the Conduct of the Proceedings of the Magistrate’s Courts of South Africa GN R 3.
152.
In accordance with Art. 173(2) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Chapter 12 of the Laws of Malta).
153.
Arts. 1251-2(1), 1251–8 & 1251-12(1) NCPC.
154.
SS. 15(1), (3) & (6) MA.
155.
Court-annexed is governed by Arts. 1734–1737 CPC.
156.
Art. 214B CPC.
157.
Art. 169 CPC.
158.
i.e. Arts. 55 & 941 CPC of the City of Mexico or Art. 287 Cc of the City of Mexico.
159.
Cameroun, Art. 3 CPC; Gabon, Art. 425 CPC, Central Africa Republic, Art. 401 CPC.
160.
Cour suprême du Tchad, 3.3.2005, arrêt n° 014/CS/CJ/SC/05, http://www.juricaf.org/arret/TCHAD-COURSUPREME-20050303-014CSCJSC05 (accessed 07.07.14).
161.
In accordance with Art. 140(3) CPC, the judge may direct the parties to mediation or any other procedure for voluntary settlement of their dispute. The same opportunity is given in the field of commercial disputes. Note Art. 374(2) CPC.
162.
Croatia, for instance, in accordance Art. 19(1) MA.
163.
Art. 15(1) ZARSS.
164.
Art. 1383 § 1 k.p.c. However this article relates only to the court’s decision referring parties to mediation. The influence of party’s refusal on the court costs is regulated in art. 103 k.p.c. Pursuant to art. 103 § 1, notwithstanding the outcome of a case, the court may order a party or an intervenor to reimburse any costs caused by their undue or evidently improper conduct. In the light of art. 103 § 2, this provision shall apply in particular to refusing without due cause to participate in mediation, where the party has previously agreed to such mediation.
165.
S. 647 Act No. 89/2012 Sb. Cc.
166.
§ 282(3) ZPO and BGH, of 19.11.2008 – IV ZR 293/05, NJW-RR 2009, 637; BGH, of 18.11.1998 – VIII ZR 344/97, NJW 1999, 647; BGH, of 4.7.1977 – II ZR 55/7, NJW 1977, 2263 or (dissenting) OLG Frankfurt, of 12.05.2009 – 14 Sch 4/09, NJW-RR 2010, 788 ff or LG Heilbronn, of 10.9.2010 – 4 O 259/09, ZKM 2011, 29, all of them in relation to conciliation –not mediation- clauses.
167.
Art. 1731(4) CPC.
168.
For instance, this possibility is explicitly admitted by the Croatian MA at Art. 5.
169.
S. 31(2) of the Act LV of 2002 on Mediation. Regarding the limitation period, S. 327(1) and (2) Cc shall apply if the mediation process is successful and S. 326(2) Cc shall apply if not.
170.
S. 27A MA.
171.
Art. 1251–5 (2) NCPC.
172.
Art. 273(2) CPC.
173.
Art. 202¹ k.p.c. Morek and Rozdeiczer 2013, 789.
174.
Art. 16 MA.
175.
P. 6 MA.
176.
Consider, Cour d’appel de Douala, 29.4.2004, arrêt n° 160/CC, Société CICAM c/ BDEAC, (2006) 35 octobre-novembre-décembre, Revue camerounaise de l’arbitrage, 7.
177.
Art. 273(2) CPC.
178.
Art. 202¹ k.p.c.
179.
Art. 17 MA.
180.
Art. 10(2)(II) of the Spanish Mediation Act which prevents the parties from lodging a claim as regards the dispute while the mediation is pending. In fact, the written mediation agreement and the commencement of the mediation procedure – but not the mere existence of the mediation clause entered by the parties – prevent courts from hearing the dispute as soon as an interested party invokes the pending mediation.
181.
S. 100(2) CPC.
182.
§ 278(a) ZPO.
183.
S. 18 MA.
184.
Art. 62 Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
185.
Art. 273.°(1) CPC.
186.
CPR 3.1(2) (f); CPR 26.4(1)(2).
187.
Tokyo High Court, Judgment of 22.6.2011, Hanrei Jiho, Vol. 2116, p. 64. Quoted and translated (unofficially) by S. KAKIUCHI, 17, fn. 33.
188.
Art. 158(1) in fine Loi 2012–013 sur la mediation states that the appointment of the mediator is something for the judge of first instance to be done. Whereas art. 158(19) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation grants full power to the parties to select their mediator in case of out-of-court mediation.
189.
Art. 136 loi n° 005/2001 portant réglementation des télécommunications au Gabon.
190.
Art. 64 loi n° 009/PR/98 portant sur les télécommunications au Tchad.
191.
Art. 85 de la loi n° 2011/22 du 14.12.2011 régissant le secteur de l’électricité au Cameroun.
192.
Art. 1251–3 NCPC.
193.
Art. 7(1) MA.
194.
Art. 7 MA.
195.
Art. 9 MA.
196.
SS. 19 & 20 MA.
197.
Art. 183² § 1 k.p.c.
198.
Art. 1(2) MA. In any case, the parties have the right to ask him about his background and experience as mediator (Art. 3(5) MA).
199.
P. 3 MA.
200.
Art. 4 MA. Art. 12(1) MA clearly states the dependence of the selection of the mediator or mediators in charge of conducting the mediation on the will of the parties.
201.
Art. 7 Act 193/2006 on Mediation.
202.
Art. 1251–8 NCPC.
203.
Art. 9 MA.
204.
Rule 86 Mediation Rules.
205.
Arts. 9 & 22 MA.
206.
Art. 11(1) MA.
207.
Art. 183² § 1 k.p.c.
208.
Art. 1533(1) CPC.
209.
Art. 4(c) MA. The Explanatory Report considers them to be the most suitable to act as mediators.
210.
Art. 4 MA.
211.
Art. 183² § 2 k.p.c.
212.
Art. 186.d (3) CPC.
213.
See § 3 BRAO.
214.
See § 24 (1) (1) BNotO.
215.
Art. 10 MA.
216.
In some specific kinds of mediation he could also be granted the possibility of assessing the suitability of the dispute and the parties for mediation.
217.
Art. 13(1) & (2) MA.
218.
§ 4 MA.
219.
Mediation Act 2011, Art. 9(1).
220.
Art. 1251-2(1) & (2) NCPC.
221.
Art. 2(2) MA.
222.
Art. 9(1) MA.
223.
Art. 8(3) MA.
224.
Arts. 158(5) and 158(24) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
225.
Arts. 10 & 12 MA.
226.
Art. 2 ADR Act.
227.
An exigency of impartiality is embodied as to court-annexed mediations in S. 6 (1) MA.
228.
S. 26 MA does not refer explicitly to these obligations. In addition S. 29 MA obliges the mediator to keep certain documents for a period of 2 years since termination of the mediation.
229.
Art. 10(1) MA.
230.
S. 7(2) MA.
231.
Art. 14(1) MA.
232.
In fact, in accordance to Art. 2 (6) MA, the mediator can advise the parties.
233.
Art. 55 Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
234.
Art. 8(4) MA.
235.
Art. 10 MA.
236.
Art. 9 MA.
237.
Art. 4(4) MA.
238.
S. 25(1) Act LV of 2002 on Mediation.
239.
S. 21(1) & (2) MA.
240.
Art. 14(2)(b) Legislative Decree no. 28/2010.
241.
Art. 9 MA.
242.
Art. 7 MA.
243.
Art. 7(4) MA.
244.
According to Arts. 29 and 54 (1) Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
245.
Consider the English High Court case in Cumbria Waste Management Ltd & Lakeland Waste Management Ltd v Baines Wilson [2008] EWHC 786 (QB) and the English Technology and Construction Court case Farm Assist Limited (In Liquidation) v The Secretary of State for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs (No. 2) [2009] EWHC 1102 (TCC); [2009] B.L.R. 399 (TCC).
246.
In accordance with Art. 5(1) and (2) MA of 2012.
247.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 10.4.2009, BG9470, available (in Dutch) at: http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:PHR:2009:BG9470 (accessed, 24.6.2014).
248.
Art. 7 MA.
249.
§ 5 MA.
250.
S. 23 MA.
251.
Arts 1251-6(1) & 1251–7 NCPC.
252.
Art. 10 MA. But the mediator must draw up minutes of failure in case the parties do not reach an agreement.
253.
Art. 183⁴ § 1 k.p.c.
254.
Art. 45(d) Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
255.
Art. 9 MA.
256.
Arts. 158(9) and 158(22) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
257.
Art. 8 MA.
258.
Art. 5 MA and Art. 69 CPC.
259.
P. 5 MA.
260.
SS. 26 & 30 Act LV of 2002 on Mediation.
261.
Art. 18.° MA (Law 29/2013, 19.4.2013).
262.
§ 4(3) MA.
263.
Art. 14(7) MA and Art. 8 Cc.
264.
Art. 17 MA and Art. 137 CrimC, on breach of private law.
265.
Art. 1457 Cc.
266.
Arts. 10 & 13(6) MA.
267.
http://www.conima.org.br/codigo_etica_med, accessed 10.07.2014.
268.
S. 3 ff. MA.
269.
Art. 12 MA.
270.
Art. 183⁵ k.p.c.
271.
Art. 10 MA.
272.
Arts. 158(6)(2) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
273.
Art. 45 Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
274.
Art. 18(1) MA.
275.
Art. 1251-9(1) NCPC.
276.
Also Art. 7 MA foresees certain future research on the financing of Mediation to be sent, once finished, to the Government and the Parlament.
277.
Act 1/1996 on Free Legal Assistance. In accordance with Additional Disposition 2 MA.
278.
Art. 7(11) Act 71/1992 Coll. on Court Fees and the Criminal Register Extract Fee as amended later.
279.
Order HAP/2662/2012, of 13.12.2012.
280.
Art. 103 § 2 k.p.c.
281.
Note McMillan Williams v. Range [2004] EWCA Civ 294; [2004] 1 W.L.R. 1858, at [29] per Ward LJ. Note also, Dunnett v. Railtrack plc (2002), [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2434, CA, McMillan Williams v. Range (2004), [2004] EWCA Civ 294; [2004] 1 W.L.R. 1858 or Halsey v. Milton Keynes General NHS [2004] EWCA Civ 576; [2006] EWHC 2924 (TCC).
282.
Art. 223(6) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure.
283.
S. 20-2(1) & (2) The Dispute Act.
284.
Where full legal capacity is missing, such persons are represented by their statutory representative.
285.
Where some public entities are also accepted for mediation.
286.
A different position is found in Bulgaria, where Art. 12(2) MA permits the parties to participate in the procedure either personally or by way of a representative selected by them.
287.
Art. 19 MA.
288.
Note Art. 11 Legislative Decree n. 28/2010.
289.
Art. 151.17 CPC.
290.
Art. 11 MA.
291.
Art. 3 MA.
292.
See 5.1.4. supra.
293.
Arts. 4–8 MA.
294.
Note, for instance, the situation in Cameroun, Art. 139(2) CTravail sets forth that « les modalités de convocation et de comparution des parties sont fixées par arrêté du ministre chargé du Travail, pris après avis de la Commission nationale consultative du travail ».
295.
S. 26(2), (3) & (4) MA. S. 31 MA states that unless otherwise agreed on by the parties, the language of the mediation will be Maltese.
296.
Art. 9(1) MA.
297.
Art. 158(19) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
298.
Art. 1251–9 and 1251–10 NCPC.
299.
Art. 8(1) MA. In case no agreement is reached, the procedure is for the mediator to be established (Art. 8(2) MA).
300.
Art. 5 MA.
301.
Request (Art. 16 MA), Informative meetings (Art. 17 MA), Constitutive meeting (Art. 19 MA) and so on. Almost of all them are finally dependent on the will of the parties.
302.
Art. 183¹¹ k.p.c.
303.
Arts. 16(1) (a) and 19 (1) (g) MA.
304.
S. 19 & 20 MA.
305.
S. 6(2)(b) MA.
306.
Art. 13 MA.
307.
Art. 22(1)(I) MA considers that the mediation is termination once the time-limit agreed on by the parties is elapsed.
308.
Art. 1251-12(3) NCPC.
309.
Art. 15 MA.
310.
Art. 20(9) MA, with a potential extension of no more of 30 days in really complicated cases.
311.
Art. 23(1) MA.
312.
Art. 158(2) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
313.
Art. 158(18)(2) Loi 2012–013 sur la médiation.
314.
Art. 64(2) Loi n° 009/PR/98 portant sur les télécommunications au Tchad speaks of 2 months.
315.
Art. 349 CTravail of Central Africa Republic fixes the maximum duration of the mediation: 2 months.
316.
Art. 314(3) CTravail.
317.
Art. 18(2) MA.
318.
Arts. 98 & 98¹ k.p.c.
319.
Art. 2(5) MA clearly states that the parties may terminate the mediation at any time.
320.
Art. 14 MA.
321.
Art. 12 MA.
322.
In accordance with Art. 183¹³ § 1 & § 2 k.p.c.
323.
Art. 6 MA.
324.
Art. 273, n. 4 CPC & Art, 13(3) & (4) MA.
325.
Art. 14 MA.
326.
S. 35 Act LV of 2002 on Mediation.
327.
Art. 43(3) Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
328.
Arts. 22(5) & 26 MA.
329.
Code of Conduct, Art. 3(2).
330.
Art. 22(3)(II) MA.
331.
Art. 14 MA. This “agreement” is considered rather impractical.
332.
Art. 11(1) Legislative Decree n. 28/2010.
333.
Art. 14(1) MA.
334.
Rule 82 Mediation Rules.
335.
Art. 14(2) MA.
336.
S. 35(1) of the Act LV of 2002 on Mediation.
337.
Note S. 17B (1) MA.
338.
P. 15(1) MA.
339.
Art. 1251–10 NCPC.
340.
Art. 58(2) Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
341.
S. 30(1) MA.
342.
Art. 9(2) & (3) Act No. 3898/2010.
343.
Art. 23(2) & (3) (I) MA.
344.
S. 8, 9 &19 MA.
345.
Art. 27 MA.
346.
Art. 11(2) Legislative Decree 28/2010.
347.
Art. 12 MA & 160 Cc.
348.
Art. 151.22 CPC and Art. 2631 Cc.
349.
Consumer Credit Agreements Act, 75/2009, 112/2012, Art. 24.
350.
Art. 13(2) & (3) MA.
351.
Art. 46(c) CPC and Art. 9 Act No. 29/2013.
352.
Art. 12 MA & 39 CPC.
353.
In accordance to Arts. 49, 247, 342 & 381(1) CPC.
354.
Art. 6(1), 2008 Directive.
355.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 20.12.1013, available (in Dutch) at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:HR:2013:2049 (accessed on 25.6.20149).
356.
Art. 9 MA.
357.
Arts. 1251–15 (3) & 1251–21 NCPC.
358.
S. 32(1), (3) & (5) MA.
359.
Art. 18 MA.
360.
Art. 14.° MA (Law n.° 29/2013, 19.4.2013).
361.
S. 148 CPC.
362.
Cameroun, Art. 139(3) CTravail; Central African Republic, Art. 351(3) CTravail; Congo, Art. 226(3) CTravail; Tchad, Art. 420(3) CTravail. Also Art. 33 of the Acte uniforme portant organisation des procédures simplifiées de recouvrement et des voies d’exécution (AUPRSVE) de l’OHADA requires the settlement to be homologated by the judge in order to be fully enforceable.
363.
Art. 158(1)(2) Loi 2012–013 relative à la mediation.
364.
Arts. 2044 & 2052 Cc.
365.
Art. 516 Code des Procedures.
366.
Art. 65 § 2 Cc.
367.
S. 10 MA.
368.
Art. 1251-22(2) NCPC.
369.
S. 32(3) (b) MA.
370.
Art. 18 MA.
371.
S. 23 MA.
372.
Arts. 158(12) & 158(25)(4) Loi 2012–013 relative à la médiation.
373.
Art. 14 MA. Also the possibility of having the agreement embodied in a court-settlement is envisaged. This is especially suited in case of out-of-court mediation.
374.
§ 433a CPC.
375.
Art. 15(2) MA.
376.
Note Arts. 59 and 63 Act 192/2006 on Mediation.
377.
Conversely, those mediations falling within the scope of the Legislative Decree can reach full enforceability in accordance with its Art. 12. Following this Article, the record of the agreement reached will be homologated by the competent court after verifying that it is not contrary to public policy and that formal requirements imposed by law are respected.
378.
Art. 1733 CPC.
379.
Art. 1724 CPC.
380.
An agreement can also be treated as a judicial transaction in accordance with Art. 733 CPC.
381.
Art. 16(2) MA.
382.
Recital 8, 2008 Directive.
383.
S. 8(b) of the Cross-Border Mediation (EU Directive) Regulations 2011, clearly states that ‘“cross-border dispute” has the meaning given by article 2 of the Mediation Directive;…’. The same solution is found at S. 2 (1) of the The Cross-Border Mediation (Scotland) Regulations 2011 which states: ‘“relevant cross-border dispute” means a cross-border dispute to which the Directive applies.’
384.
In the Netherlands, the Mediation Act of November 2012 is focused on purely EU cross-border disputes (excluding Denmark) and purely internal and non-EU mediations are left outside the scope of the new legislation.
385.
“cases that at least one party is a foreign cooperation” (definition provided by the Chinese Arbitration Association).
386.
Mainly as regards the consideration of obligations arising out of the clause as precontractual, and that subjected to Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of Council of 11.7.2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), OJ L 199, of 31.7.2007 , although the recent Judgment of the Supreme Court of 8.3.2013 (No. 105/2013, LA LEY 97642/2013, upholds the contractual condition of this agreement). Or purely contractual and then subject to Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17.6.2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).
387.
In France, note Cour de cassation, Soc., 29.1.2013, n°11-28041 (http://legimobile.fr/fr/jp/j/c/civ/soc/2013/1/29/11-28041/, accessed 18.07.2014).
388.
Art. 1112 Cc.
389.
Where Art. 9(4) of Act 29/2013 recognises direct enforceability – “without the necessity of homologation by the court” – of the settlement reached via a mediation in another EU Member State “which respect letters a) and d) of paragraph 1 of this Article in so far the legal rules of that State grants it enforceability”.
390.
Since January 2015, Regulation 44/2001 has been replaced by Regulation 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the council of 12.12.2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast) OJ L 351, of 20.12.2012.
391.
OJ L 143, of 30.4.2004.
392.
OJ L 7, of 10.1.2009.
393.
OJ L 201, of 27.7.2012.
394.
Only as regards international conventions and not in accordance with German procedure law.
395.
Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters of 30.10.2007, OJ L339, of 21.12.2007.
396.
Art. 425 CPC.
397.
Chapter 45 CPC & Chapter 31 Arbitration Procedural Code.
398.
Certain flexibilization of this rule was provided by Richman v. Ben-Tovim, 2007 2 All SA 234 (SCA).

References

ADR Centre. 2010. The cost of non ADR – surveying and showing the actual costs of intra-community commercial litigation. Rome. Available at: www.adrcenter.com/jamsinternational/civil-justice/Survey_Data_Report.pdf. Accessed 14 July 2014.
Alexander, N. 2006. Global trends in mediation. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.
Google Scholar
Alexander, N. 2009. International and comparative mediation legal perspectives. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.
Google Scholar
Alexander, N. 2010. Four mediation stories from across the globe. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 74: 732.
Article Google Scholar
Alfini, J.J., S.B. Press, J.R. Sternlight, et al. 2006. Mediation theory and practice, 2nd ed. Newark: LexisNexis.
Google Scholar
Andrews, N. 2012. The three paths of justice – courts proceedings, arbitration and mediation in England. Dordrecht: Springer Science.
Book Google Scholar
Andrews, N. 2014. England and Wales. In Global perspectives on ADR, ed. C. Esplugues and S. Barona, 103. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Andrews, N., N. Trocker, and A. De Luca. 2011. The duty to consider mediation: Salvaging value from the European Mediation Directive. In La mediazione civile alla luce della direttiva 2008/52/CE, 13. Florenze: FUP.
Google Scholar
Argunov, A., V. Argunov, and A. Akhmetbekov. 2014. National report – Russia. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Aylmer, W. 2012. Ireland. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 239. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Babić, D. 2014a. National report – Croatia. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Babić, D. 2014b. Croatia. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 81. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Bach, I., and U.P. Gruber. 2012. Germany. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 159. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Barona, S. 2012. La mediación: mecanismo para mejorar y complementar la vía jurisdiccional. Ventajas e inconvenientes tras la aprobación de la Ley 5/2012, de 6 de julio, de mediación en asuntos civiles y mercantiles. In Estudios sobre el Significado e Impacto de la Mediación: ¿Una Respuesta Innovadora en los Diferentes Ámbitos Jurídicos? ed. J.F. Etxeberría Guridi. Cizur Menor: UPV/Kutxa/Thomson Reuters Aranzadi.
Google Scholar
Barona, S. 2013. Mediación en asuntos civiles y mercantiles en España. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.
Google Scholar
Barona, S., and C. Esplugues. 2014. ADR mechanisms and their incorporation into global justice in the twenty-first century: Some concepts and trends. In Global perspectives on ADR, ed. C. Esplugues and S. Barona, 1. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Basso, M., and F. Polido. 2014. National report – Brasil. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Ben Hamida, W. 2014. National report – Lebanon. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Bernt, C. 2014. National report – Norway. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Boulle, L., M.T. Colatrella, and A.P. Picchioni. 2008. Mediation. Skills and techniques. Newark: LexisNexis.
Google Scholar
Boumakani, R. 1999. Les médiateurs de la République en Afrique Noire francophone: Sénégal, Gabon et Burkina-Faso. Revue internationale de Droit Compare 2: 307.
Article Google Scholar
Broodryk, Th. 2014. National report – South Africa. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Bu, Y. 2014. China. In Global perspectives on ADR, ed. C. Esplugues and S. Barona, 79. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Bühring-Uhle, Ch. 2006. Arbitration and mediation in international business. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.
Google Scholar
Busch, D. 2010. How does culture affect conflict mediation? Disentangling concepts from theory and practice. In International and regional perspectives on cross-cultural mediation, ed. D. Busch, C.H. Mayer, and Ch.M. Boness, 15. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar
Camara, F., and A. Ciss. 2009. Arbitrage et médiation dans les cultures juridiques négro-africaines: entre la prédisposition à dénouer et la mission de trancher. Revue de l’Arbitrage 2: 285.
Google Scholar
Capelo, M.J. 2014. National report – Portugal. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Cappelleti, M., and B. Garth. 1981. Access to justice and the welfare state: An introduction. In Access to justice and the welfare state, ed. M. Cappelleti, 1. Florence: EUI.
Google Scholar
Chin-A-Fat, B. 2014. National report – The Netherlands. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Chovanková, C. 2014. Slovakia. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 385. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Clarke, A. 2008. The future of civil mediation. Arbitration 74: 419.
Google Scholar
Coimisiún um Athchóiriú/Law Reform Commission. 2010. Report alternative dispute resolution: Mediation and conciliation (LRC 98–2010). Dublin: LRC.
Google Scholar
Conseil d’Etat. 2010. Développer la médiation dans le cadre de l’Union européenne. Étude adoptée par l’Assemblée générale du Conseil d’État le 29 juillet 2010, Direction de l’information légale et administrative. Paris. Available at: http://www.aihja.org/images/users/1/files/mediation.pdf?PHPSESSID=f83dg63dqj61vokoep4kk44fu1. Accessed 18 July 2014.
Cousteaux, G., and S. Poillot-Peruzzetto. 2014. Country report – France. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Cover, M., and E. Lecchi. 2008. Mediating competition law cases. Arbitration 74(2): 121.
Google Scholar
Crawford, E.W., and J.M. Carruthers. 2012. United Kingdom. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 515. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Crawford, E.W., and J.M. Carruthers. 2014. United Kingdom. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 461. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Cutolo, D., and M.A. Shalaby. 2010. Mandatory mediation and the right to court proceedings. Dispute Resolution International 4: 131.
Google Scholar
Davis, W., and H. Turku., J. Disp. Resol. 2011. Access to justice and alternative dispute resolution. Journal of Dispute Resolution 1: 47.
Google Scholar
De Luca, A. 2014. Country report – Italy. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
De Palo, G., L. D’Urso, M. Trevor, et al. 2014. ‘Rebooting’ the mediation directive: Assessing the limited impact of its implementation and proposing measures to increase the number of mediations in the EU. Brussels: DG for Internal Policies. Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/493042/IPOL-JURI_ET%282014%29493042_EN.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2014.
De Roo, A., and R. Jagtenberg. 2005. ADR in the European Union: Provisional assessment of comparative research in progress. In Cadiet, L. (Dir.), Th. Clay, E. Jeuland. Médiation et arbitrage. Alternative dispute resolution. Alternative à la justice ou justice alternative? Perspectives comparatives, LexisNexis, Litec, Paris, 179.
Google Scholar
Deckert, K. 2013. Mediation in France: Legal framework and practical experiences. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 455. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Diamantopoulos, G., and V. Koumpli. 2014. Country report – Greece. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Ellger, R. 2013. Mediation in Ireland: Growing importance of ADR driven by budgetary restraints and docket congestion – a cheap and easy way out? In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 629. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Emilianides, A.C., and N. Charalampidou. 2014. Cyprus. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 103. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Emilianides, A.C., and X. Xenofontos. 2012. Cyprus. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 87. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Ervo, L., and L. Sippel. 2012. Scandinavian countries. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 371. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Esplugues, C. 2011. A new general regime for mediation in Spain: The Royal-Decree-Law 5/2012 of March 5th, 2012, Zeitschrift für Zivilprozess International. Jahrbuch des Internationalen Zivilprozessrechts 16: 95.
Google Scholar
Esplugues, C. 2013a. Access to justice or access to states courts’ justice in Europe? The directive 2008/52/EC on civil and commercial mediation, Revista de Processo 221 (July), 303.
Google Scholar
Esplugues, C. 2013b. El régimen jurídico de la mediación civil y mercantil en conflictos trasfronterizos en España tras la Ley 5/2012, de 6 de julio. Boletín Mexicano de Derecho Comparado XLVI(136): 166.
Google Scholar
Esplugues, C. 2014. Civil and commercial mediation in the EU after the transposition of directive 2008/52/EC. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 485. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
European Commission. 2012. Business-to-business alternative dispute resolution in the EU (Flash Eurobarometer 347). Brussels, March-April 2012. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_347_en.pdf. Accessed 18 July 2014.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2010. European judicial systems. Edition 2010 (data 2008): Efficiency and quality of justice. Available at: https://wcd.coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&InstranetImage=1694098&SecMode=1&DocId=1653000&Usage=2. Accessed 14 July 2014.
Falk, G., and G. Koren. 2005. Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz, Kommentar zum ZivMediatG. Wien: Verlag Österreich.
Google Scholar
Frauenberger-Pfeiler, U. 2012. Austria. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 1. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Frauenberger-Pfeiler, U. 2014. Austria. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 1. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Fricero, N. 2011. Le décret du 1er octobre 2010: une justice conciliatoire modernisée, Droit et procédures, Janvier, 1.
Google Scholar
Fursa, S.Y. 2014. Country report – Ukraine. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Galanter, M. 1981. Justice in many rooms. In Access to justice and the welfare state, ed. M. Cappelleti, 147. Florence: EUI.
Google Scholar
Georgiev, E., and Ch. Jessel-Holst. 2013. Mediation in Bulgaria: Legal regime, EU harmonisation and practical experience. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 333. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Gonzalez Martin, N. 2014. Country report – Mexico. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Gruber, U.P., and I. Bach. 2014. Germany. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 155. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Grzybczyk, K., and G. Fraczek. 2012. Poland. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 299. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Guillemard, S. 2014. Country report – Québec. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Guinchard, E. 2014. France. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 139. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Guinchard, E., and M. Boucaron-Nardetto. 2012. France. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 131. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Harsági, V., C. Gergely, and N. Zoltán. 2014. Hungary. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 201. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Hopt, K.J. 2010. Mediation. Eine Einführung. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 74: 723.
Article Google Scholar
Hopt, K.J., and F. Steffek. 2013. Mediation: Comparison of laws, regulatory models, fundamental issues. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 3. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Iglesias, J.L., C. Esplugues, G. Palao, et al. 2012. Spain. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 445. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Iglesias, J.L., G. Palao, R. Espinosa, et al. 2014. Spain. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 419. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Jankowski, J., S. Cieślak, and M. Muliński. 2014. Country report – Poland. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Jessel-Holst, Ch. 2013. Mediation in Hungary: Legal foundations, recent reforms, EU convergence. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 605. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Jovin Hrastnik, B. 2011. The Slovenian legislation implementing the EU mediation directive. Brussels: Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department C: Citizen’s Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Legal Affairs.
Google Scholar
Kakiuchi, S. 2014. Country report – Japan. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Karagussov, F. 2014. Country report – Kazakhstan. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Kengyel, M., V. Harsági, and Z. Nemessányi. 2012. Hungary. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 217. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Klamaris, N.K., and C.G. Chronopoulou. 2013. Mediation in Greece: A contemporary procedural approach to resolving disputes. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 585 Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Knez, R., and P. Weingerl. 2014a. Country report – Slovenia. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Knez, R., and P. Weingerl. 2014b. Slovenia. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 397. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Kourtis, V. 2014. Greece. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 181. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Kourtis, V., and E. Sivena. 2012. Greece. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 193. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Kulms, R. 2013. Privatising civil justice and the day in court. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 205. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Leon, Ch., and I. Rohracher. 2012. Austria. In EU mediation law and practice, ed. G. De Palo and M.B. Trevor, 11. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Lopes, D. 2014. Portugal. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 305. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Mattei, U. 2007. Access to justice. A renewed global issue? In General reports to the XVIIth congress of the international academy of comparative law, ed. K. Boele-Woelki and S. Van Erp, 385. Brussels: Bruylant.
Google Scholar
Mattl, Ch., A. Prokop-Zischka, and S. Ferz. 2006. Mediation in Austria. In Global trends in mediation, ed. N. Alexander, 65. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.
Google Scholar
Menétrey, S. 2014a. Country report – Luxembourg. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Menétrey, S. 2014b. Luxembourg. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 253. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Milu, R.G., and R.G. Taus. 2012. Romania. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 351. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Milu, R.G., and R.G. Taus. 2014. Romania. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 343. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Morek, R., and L. Rozdeiczer. 2013. Mediation in Poland: Time for a quiet revolution? In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 775. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Natov, N., B. Musseva, V. Pandov, T. Tsenova, and S. Yordansky. 2012. Bulgaria. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 69. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Natov, N., B. Musseva, and V. Pandov. 2014. Bulgaria. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe. Cross-border mediation, II, ed. C. Esplugues, 253. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Nekrošius, V., and V. Vėbraitė. 2012. Baltic countries. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 29. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Nekrošius, V., and V. Vėbraitė. 2014. Baltic countries. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 29. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Ngwanza, A. 2014. La mediation dans l’espace CEMAC. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Nolan-Haley, J.M. 2012. Is Europe headed down the primrose path with mandatory mediation? North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 37: 981.
Google Scholar
Patrão, A. 2012. Portugal. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 327. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Pauknerová, M., J. Brodec, and M. Pfeiffer. 2012. Czech Republic. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 97. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Pauknerová, M., J. Brodec, and M. Pfeiffer. 2014. Czech Republic. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 125. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Pelzer, N. 2014. Country report – Germany. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Pruckner, M. 2003. Recht der Mediation. Wien: Linde Verlag.
Google Scholar
Queirolo, I., and Ch. Gambino. 2014. Italy. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 221. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Queirolo, I., L. Carpaneto, and S. Dominelli. 2012. Italy. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 251. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Rajaonera, L., and R. Jakoba. 2014. Country report – Madagascar. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Relis, T. 2009. Perceptions in litigation and mediation. Cambridge: Lawyers, Defendants, Plaintiffs, and Gendered Parties, CUP.
Book Google Scholar
Risak, M. 2014. Country report – Austria. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Risse, J. 2003. Wirtschaftsmediation. Munich: Beck.
Google Scholar
Roth, M., and D. Gherdane. 2013. Mediation in Austria: The European pioneer in mediation law and practice. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Samb, M. 2014. Country report – Senegal. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Sanco, D.G. 2009. Study on the use of alternative dispute resolution in the European Union. Final report submitted by civic consulting of the Consumer Policy Evaluation Consortium (CPEC) Framework Contract Lot 2 – DG Sanco. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/archive/redress_cons/adr_study.pdf. Accessed 14 July 2014.
Sander, F.E.A. 1979. Varieties of dispute processing. In The pound conference: Perspectives on justice in the future (proceedings of the national conference on the causes of the popular dissatisfaction with the administration of justice), ed. A.R. Levin and R.R. Wheeler, 65. St. Paul: West.
Google Scholar
Şandru, M., and D. Cälin. 2014. Country report – Romania. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Scherpe, J.M., and B. Marten. 2013. Mediation in England and Wales: Regulation and practice. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 365. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Schmidt, J.P. 2013. Mediation in Portugal: Growing up in a sheltered home. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 809. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Schmiedel, L. 2013. Mediation in The Netherlands: Between state promotion and private promotion. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 697. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Sciberras Camilleri, T. 2012. Malta. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 283. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Shen, K.L. 2014. Country report – Taiwan. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Silva Antares Pires, C.da. 2014. National report – Macau. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Sipel, L. 2014. Scandinavian countries. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 359. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Steffek, F. 2010. Rechtsvergleichende Erfahrungen für die Regelung der Mediation. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 74: 841.
Article Google Scholar
Sussman, E. 2009. Final Step: Issues in enforcing the mediation settlement agreement. In Contemporary issues in international arbitration and mediation, The Fordham papers 2008, ed. A.W. Rovine. Leiden: M. Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Taelman, P., and S. Voet. 2014. National report – Belgium. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
The Gill Report. 2009a. Report of the Scottish civil courts review, Vol. I, Chapters 1–9. Available at: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/aboutscs/vol1chap1_9.pdf?sfvrsn=10. Accessed 15 July 2014.
The Gill Report. 2009b. Report of the Scottish civil courts review, Vol. II, Chapters 10–15. Available at: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/aboutscs/vol2chap10_15.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed 15 July 2014.
The Right Honourable the Lord Woolf, Master of the Rolls. 1996. Access to justice final report. Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/final/index.htm. Accessed 17 July 2014.
Tilman, V. 2011. Lessons learnt from the implementation of the EU mediation directive: The business perspective, directorate general for internal policies. Brussels: Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Legal Affairs. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201105/20110518ATT19584/20110518ATT19584EN.pdf. Accessed 14 July 2014.
Tochtermann, P. 2013. Mediation in Germany: The mediation act – alternative dispute resolution at the crossroads. In Mediation principles and regulation in comparative perspective, ed. K.J. Hopt and F. Steffek, 521. Oxford: OUP.
Google Scholar
Traest, M. 2012. Belgium. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 45. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Traest, M. 2014. Belgium. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 39. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Trocker, N., and A. De Luca. 2011. Presentazione. In La mediazione civile alla luce della direttiva 2008/52/CE, ed. N. Trocker and A. De Luca. Florenze: FUP.
Google Scholar
Van Hoek, A., and J. Kocken. 2012. The Netherlands. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, national mediation rules and procedures, I, ed. C. Esplugues, J.L. Iglesias, and G. Palao, 491. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Van Leynseele, P., and F. Van De Putte. 2005. La médiation dans le Code judiciaire. Journal des Tribunaux 6179:297.
Google Scholar
Vodounon-Djegni, R. 2014. Country report – Benin. Report presented at the XIXth International Congress of Comparative Law, 20–26 July 2014. Vienna: International Academy of Comparative Law.
Google Scholar
Wagner, G. 2012. Harmonization of civil procedure – policy perspective. In Civil litigation in a globalising world, ed. X.W. Kramer and C.H. Van Rhee, 93. Heidelberg: Springer.
Chapter Google Scholar
Yu, H.L. 2009. Is court-annexed mediation desirable? Civil Justice Quarterly 28: 515.
Google Scholar
Zachariasiewicz, M. 2014. Poland. In Civil and commercial mediation in Europe, II cross-border mediation, ed. C. Esplugues, 273. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of International Law, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
Carlos Esplugues LLM (Harvard), MSc (Edinburgh)

Authors

Carlos Esplugues LLM (Harvard), MSc (Edinburgh)
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Esplugues LLM (Harvard), MSc (Edinburgh) .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Department of International Law, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
Carlos Esplugues
École de Technologie Supérieure, Montreal, Québec, Canada
Louis Marquis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Esplugues, C. (2015). General Report: New Developments in Civil and Commercial Mediation – Global Comparative Perspectives. In: Esplugues, C., Marquis, L. (eds) New Developments in Civil and Commercial Mediation. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18135-6_1

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18135-6_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18134-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18135-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics