header-logo header-logo

31 July 2019 / James South
Issue: 7850 / Categories: Features , Mediation , ADR
printer mail-detail

Working better together

James South marks a mediation milestone— the signing of the Singapore Convention—and predicts an increased uptake in mediation

The signing of the Singapore Convention on Mediation on 7 August this year, and subsequent ratification by countries around the world, will prove to be a significant milestone in the use of mediation, not only for cross border disputes but for domestic jurisdictions as well. The Convention was approved by resolution of the United Nations General Assembly in December 2018 and is intended to do the same for mediated settlements in cross-border disputes as the New York Convention of 1959 has done for International Arbitral Awards. Despite this positivity, the Convention is unlikely to change the field of mediation overnight. Nonetheless, critics who expect no change at all are also likely to stand corrected over time. In order to understand the reasons for change, one must look closer at both history and circumstance.

Why a Mediation Convention?

For decades there has been a wish to improve the status of cross border mediated agreements

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