header-logo header-logo

Med-Arb: a successful combination for beneficiaries?

28 November 2019
Issue: 7866 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
12260
Dr James Behrens considers the pros & cons of evaluative mediation in resolving trust & estate disputes
  • Should mediation be a facilitative, not an evaluative, process?
  • A mediator is not being paid to give legal advice.

There are many reasons to use mediation for trust and estate disputes. Mediation avoids frittering away the trust assets through litigation, and so preserves them for the beneficiaries; it helps to avoid any escalation of family conflicts; it aids in preserving long-term relationships between the trustees and the beneficiaries, as well as the relationships between the beneficiaries themselves.

This can be achieved thanks to the privacy, informality and confidentiality of the mediation process and also because of the flexibility in the types of solutions which mediation can achieve. For example, when it comes to varying the trust to obtain a tax advantage, there is much to be said in favour of using it. Also, a refusal to mediate may lead to adverse costs consequences in subsequent litigation. A party who refuses to mediate and subsequently

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll