header-logo header-logo

At cross purposes?

26 May 2011 / Emily Lew , David Phillips
Issue: 7467 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Mediation
printer mail-detail

David Phillips & Emily Lew discuss the merits & limitations of the EU Mediation Directive

The EU Directive on mediation in civil and commercial matters was adopted by the European Parliament on 23 April 2008. The Directive applies only to European cross-border disputes, rather than to disputes within any one member state and covers five broad areas. These are:

(1) encouragement by member states of mediator training and the development and adherence to a voluntary code of conduct;

(2) judicial powers to invite parties
to mediate;

(3) obligations on member states to ensure mediation settlement agreements are enforceable as if they are court judgments (should all parties consent);

(4) confidentiality of mediations such that submissions made during a mediation cannot be used in subsequent judicial proceedings if the mediation fails; and

(5) the suspension of limitation periods while parties mediate.

EU member states (except Denmark, which has opted out) had until 21 May 2011 to implement the new rules into national law. Estonia, France, Italy and Portugal have already notified the Commission that they have implemented

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll