header-logo header-logo

27 September 2007 / Tony Allen
Issue: 7290 / Categories: Features , ADR
printer mail-detail

Preserving integrity

As ADR usage increases, Tony Allen explains the steps needed to ensure mediation confidentiality

The EU draft Directive on mediation (COM (2004) 718) encourages member states to introduce legislation by September 2007 providing for non-admissibility both of evidence from mediators and about what happened at a mediation. Mediators and mediation service providers would not be compelled to give evidence of:
- invitations to mediate or a party’s unwillingness to mediate;
- offers to settle, statements or admissions made by a party during a mediation;
- mediator proposals, or a party’s willingness to accept such a proposal; or
- any document prepared solely for the purpose of a mediation.

admission of evidence

The Directive also proposes that a court should not be able to admit any such evidence except to enforce a settlement agreement reached as a direct result of a mediation, or where the mediator and the parties agree. These proposals have so far been ignored in the UK, though several other European states have enacted such provisions. Do we need such legislation here? Two recent first instance decisions suggest

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll