header-logo header-logo

08 March 2023
Issue: 8016 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Arbitration , International
printer mail-detail

UK confirms it will sign the Singapore Convention on Mediation

The government has committed itself to ratifying the Singapore Convention on Mediation, in a move welcomed by the legal profession

The convention provides a framework for the recognition and enforcement of international commercial settlement agreements reached via mediation. It enables a party to enforce a cross-border mediated agreement in any country that is party to the convention without needed to launch an action for breach of contract. The convention also establishes rules on procedures for cooperation on the taking of evidence, service of legal documents and cooperation between competent authorities.

Some 55 countries have signed it since it opened for signature in 2019, and it has been ratified by 10 countries, Fiji, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Belarus, Ecuador, Honduras, Turkey, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Singapore.

The government consulted on whether to join the convention in February 2022, with a majority of responses received in favour of ratification. In a statement this week, Justice minister Lord Bellamy said the government had concluded ‘it is the right time for the UK to become a party to the convention’ and would sign it as soon as possible.

Lord Bellamy said: ‘This decision will be a clear signal to our international partners that the UK is committed to maintaining and strengthening its position as a centre for dispute resolution and to promote the UK’s flourishing legal and mediation sectors.’

Bar Council vice chair Sam Townend KC said: ‘Barristers make excellent mediators and mediation advocates; the profession leads the world in the provision of mediation as one of many forms of dispute resolution.

‘The Bar Council welcomes the UK government’s commitment to ratify the Singapore Convention. The move bolsters confidence in the UK legal sector and is further recognition of the vital contribution that British lawyers make to UK exports.’

Henrietta Jackson-Stops, member of the London International Disputes Week (LIDW) Strategy Group, said the government’s decision was ‘a clear indication of the UK's ambition to remain a global leader in the development of international dispute resolution.

‘Signing the convention will give added weight to London as a centre to resolve disputes and help raise the profile of mediation. The wider dispute resolution offering is a key agenda item for discussion at LIDW23, which will be an even hotter topic given this news.’

Issue: 8016 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Arbitration , International
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Mark Hastings, Quillon Law

NLJ Career Profile: Mark Hastings, Quillon Law

Mark Hastings, founding partner of Quillon Law, on turning dreams into reality and pushing back on preconceptions about partnership

Kingsley Napley—Silvia Devecchi

Kingsley Napley—Silvia Devecchi

New family law partner for Italian and international clients appointed

Mishcon de Reya—Susannah Kintish

Mishcon de Reya—Susannah Kintish

Firm elects new chair of tier 1 ranked employment department

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll