Mandatory Mediation in Family Disputes – An Emerging Trend in the European Union?
Indre Korsakoviene
Mykolas Romeris University , Lithuaniahttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7834-2789
Julija Branimirova Radanova
Mykolas Romeris University , Bulgariahttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9672-2582
Agnė Tvaronavičienė
Mykolas Romeris University , Lithuaniahttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5489-5570
Abstract
The Mediation Directive (2008) obliged the Member States of the European Union to promote the use of mediation through their own means. A decade later, the results of several studies revealed that national efforts to foster mediation were not as effective as planned in most cases. Despite some scholars’ concerns about restricting mediation voluntariness as means for increasing its application, Italy introduced a mandatory mediation scheme which proved that forcing parties to mediate results in high numbers of mediation procedures with favorable success rates. This led other Member States to reconsider the role of the State in fostering mediation. This article tackles the prevalence of mandatory mediation in family disputes, as an area widely recognized as most suitable for it. The co-authors raised the research question of whether the introduction of mandatory mediation in family disputes is an emerging trend in the European Union. A short overview of the mandatory mediation concept and the existing doctrinal models was presented as a theoretical background of this research. Based on the review of the scientific literature, four prevailing models were identified and briefly described. Secondly, the map of mandatory mediation within the European Union was updated with the latest data collected from the most recent legislative amendments and testimonies of the corresponding national mediation experts. Thirdly, a brief examination of the current mandatory mediation models in the Member States was conducted. The in-depth analysis of the obtained results shows that introducing mandatory mediation in family disputes is a prevailing trend in fostering mediation in the European Union. Consequently, it was identified that the variety of implemented models went far beyond the existing doctrinal classification, which needs to be reconsidered by future research in this field.
Keywords:
family dispute, family mediation, Mediation Directive, mandatory mediation, categorical mandatory mediation, discretional mandatory mediation, quasi-mandatory mediationReferences
“Commission report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the application of Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (COM(2016)0542).” Accessed January 10, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7–2011–0343_EN.html.
Alexander, Nadja. Global trends in mediation: riding the third wave, 2nd ed. Kluwer Law International, 2006.
Alexander, Nadja. International and Comparative Mediation: Legal Perspectives. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2009.
Andrews, Neil. “Mediation: International Experience and Global Trends.” Journal of International and Comparative Law 4, no. 2 (2017): 217–252.
Attorney-General’s Department (Australia). “The Resolve to Resolve – Embracing ADR to Improve Access to Justice in the Federal Jurisdiction: A Report to the Attorney-General.” September 15, 2009. Accessed February 5, 2023. https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2009–09/apo-nid67039.pdf.
Bienvenu, Pierre. “The Enforcement of Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses in Canada and the United States.” Paper presented at Annual Convention of the International Bar Association, 2002.
Boettger, Ulrich. “Efficiency Versus Party Empowerment – Against a Good-Faith Requirement in Mandatory Mediation.” Review of Litigation 23, (2004): [vii]–[viii]. (Crossref)
Brožová, Dagmar, and Jan Zouhar. “The effect of court-mandated mediation on the length of court proceedings in the Czech Republic.” European Journal on Law and Economy 53, (2022): 485–508. https://doi-org.skaitykla.mruni.eu/10.1007/s10657-022-09729-6. (Crossref)
Ceno, Julian Sidoli del. “Compulsory mediation: civil justice, human rights and proportionality.” International Journal of Law in the Built Environment 6, no. 3 (October 2014): 286–299. (Crossref)
Chan, P.C.H. Klaus J. Hopt, and Felix Steffek. Mediation: Principles and Regulation in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. https://doi-org.skaitykla.mruni.eu/10.1017/S1566752912001322.
Constantinescu, Miruna, and Monica Simona Corchis. “Are Mediation Clauses Binding and Mandatory.” Juridical Tribune 7, no. 1 (June 2017): 53–63.
D’Urso, Leonardo. “Italy’s ‘Required Initial Mediation Session’: Bridging the Gap between Mandatory and Voluntary Mediation Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation.” The Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Pre- vention & Resolution, no. 36 (April 2018): 57–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/ alt.21731. (Crossref)
De Palo, Giuseppe, and Ashley E. Oleson. “Regulation of dispute resolution in Italy: The bumps in the road to successful ADR.” In Regulating Dispute Resolution: ADR and Access to Justice at the crossroads, edited by Felix Steffek and Hannes Unberath, 239–268. UK: Hart Publishing, 2013.
De Palo, Giuseppe, and Romina Canessa. “Sleeping – Comatose – Only Manda- tory Consideration of Mediation Can Awake Sleeping Beauty in the European Union.” Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 16, no. 3 (2014–2015): [xii]–[xiv].
De Palo, Giuseppe. “A Ten–Year–Long ‘EU Mediation Paradox’ When an EU Directive Needs to Be More... Directive.” European Parliament Briefing 1, 6 (2018). http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2018/608847/IPOL_BRI(2018)608847_EN.pdf.
De Palo, Giuseppe. “Mediating Mediation Itself: The Easy Opt-out Model Settles the Perennial Dispute between Voluntary and Mandatory Mediation.” Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 22, no. 3 (Spring 2021): 543–568.
European E-Justice. “Family mediation.” https://e-justice.europa.eu/521/EN/family_mediation.
European Parliament. “‘Rebooting’ the Mediation Directive: Assessing the Limited Impact of its Implementation and Proposing Measures to Increase the Number of Mediations in the EU, requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs, (2014).” Accessed February 6, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/493042/IPOL-JURI_ET(2014)493042_EN.pdf.
European Parliament. “European Implementation Assessment on the Mediation Directive by the Ex-Post Impact Assessment Unit of the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS), PE 593.789 (December 2016).” Accessed January 10, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2016/593789/EPRS_IDA(2016)593789_EN.pdf.
European Parliament. “Quantifying the cost of not using mediation — a data analysis, PE 453.180 (April 2011).” Accessed January 10, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201105/20110518ATT19592/20110518ATT19592EN.pdf.
European Parliament. “The implementation of the Mediation Directive. PE 571.395 (November 29, 2016).” Accessed January 10, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2016/571395/IPOL_IDA%282016%29571395_EN.pdf.
Hanks, Melisa. “Perspectives on mandatory mediation.” University Of New South Wales Law Journal 35, no. 3 (2012): 929–952.
Hinshaw, Art, Andrea Kupfer Schneider, and Sarah Rudolph Cole. “Frank Sander: Father of Court-based Dispute Resolution.” In Discussions in Dispute Resolution: The Foundational Articles, 336–337. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. (Crossref)
Hoom, Machteld W. de. “Making Mediation Work in Europe: What’s Needed Is a New Balance between Mediation and Court Proceedings.” Journal of Dispute Resolution Magazine 20, no. 2 (Spring 2014): 22–27.
Jaspers, Celine. “Mandatory Mediation from a European and Comparative Law Perspective.” In Plurality and Diversity of Family Relations in Europe, edited by Katharina Boele-Woelki and Dieter Martiny, 341–369. UK: Intersentia, 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/1942/30415. (Crossref)
Kent, Adele. “A Behind-the-Bench Look at the Canadian Judicial System.” Judges’ Journal 50, no. 3 (Summer 2011): 8–13.
Kovach, Kimberlee K. “New Wine Requires New Wineskins: Transforming Lawyer Ethics for Effective Representation in a Non-Adversarial Approach to Problem Solving: Mediation (Georgian Text).” Alternative Dispute Resolution Yearbook 2012, (2012): 139–173.
Lande, John. “Using Dispute System Design Methods to Promote Good-Faith Participation in Court-Connected Mediation Programs.” UCLA Law Review 50, no. 1 (October 2002): 69–142. (Crossref)
Limbury, Alan. “Compulsory Mediation – The Australian Experience.” Kluwer Mediation Blog. October, 22, 2018. Accessed February 5, 2023. https://mediationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/10/22/compulsory-mediation-aus- tralian-experience/.
Malacka, Michal. “Multi-Door Courthouse established through the European Mediation Directive?.” International and Comparative Law Review 16, no. 1 (2016): 127–142. (Crossref)
McNamara, Philip. “Mandatory and quasi-mandatory mediation.” Australian bar review 47, no. 3 (2019): 215–245.
Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania. “On Approval of the Plan for Ex Post Impact Assessment of the Current Legal Regulation on Mandatory Mediation in Family Disputes.” Accessed February 12, 2023. https://tm.lrv.lt/lt/teisine-informacija/galiojancio-teisinio-reguliavimo-poveikio-ex-post-ver- tinimas.
Plevri, Anna. “Mandatory Initial Mediation Session in the Legal Order of Greece: A Step Forward for a Balanced Relationship between Mediation and Judicial Proceedings?.” Yearbook on International Arbitration 7, (2021): 209–222.
Publication Office of the European Union. “Commission Green paper on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law (COM(2002)196), 19 April 2002.” Accessed January 14, 2023. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/61c3379d-bc12–431f-a051-d82fefc20a04.
Publication Office of the European Union. “Study for an evaluation and implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC, (May 24, 2016).” Accessed January 10, 2023. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/study-for-an-evaluation-and-implementation-of-directive-2008–52-ec-the-mediation-directive-pbDS0114825/.
Quek, Dorcas. “Mandatory Mediation: An Oxymoron – Examining the Feasibility of Implementing a Court Mandated Mediation Program.” Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 11, no. 2 (Spring 2010): 479–510.
Rewald, Roman. “Mediation in Europe: The Most Misunderstood Method of Alternative Dispute Resolution.” The Wail World Arbitration Report (2014).
Rhoades, Helen. “Mandatory mediation of family disputes: reflections from Australia.” Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law 32, no. 2 (September 2010): 183–194. https://doi-org.skaitykla.mruni.eu/10.1080/09649069.2010.506313. (Crossref)
Sander, Frank E.A. “Another View of Mandatory Mediation.” Dispute Resolution Magazine, no. 13 (2007).
Schaffer, Daniel Kaufman. “An Examination of Mandatory Court-Based Mediation.” Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management 84, no. 3 (2018): 229–238.
Shtefan, Anna, and Yurii Prytyka. “Mediation in the EU: Common Characteristics and Advantages over Litigation.” InterEULawEast: Journal for the International and European law, economics and market integrations 8, no. 2 (2021): 175–190. (Crossref)
Thrush, Arlin R. “Public Health and Safety Hazards versus Confidentiality: Expanding the Mediation Door of the Multi-Door Courthouse.” Journal of Dispute Resolution, no. 2 (1994): 235–258.
Tjersland, Odd, Wenke Gulbrandsen, and Hanne Haavind. “Mandatory Mediation outside the Court: A Process and Effect Study.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly 33, no. 1 (2015): 23–28. (Crossref)
Tvaronavičienė, Agnė, and Odeta Intė. Mandatory Mediation in Family Disputes in Lithuania: Model and First Year Application Experience. Wrocław: Wydział Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2021.
Tvaronavičienė, Agnė, Natalija Kaminskienė, Dana Rone, and Rea Uudeküll. “Mediation in the Baltic States: Developments and Challenges of Implementation.” Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 5, no. 4 (2022): 68–86. https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-5.4-a000427. (Crossref)
UNCITRAL. “UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Mediation and International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, 2018.” Accessed February 8, 2023. https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/22-01363_mediation_guide_e_ebook_rev.pdf.
van Rhee, C.H. “Mandatory Mediation before Litigation in Civil and Commercial Matters: A European Perspective.” Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, no. 4, 2021: 7–24. (Crossref)
Vassiliki, Koumpli. “Greece: Institutionalizing Mediation Through Mandatory Initial Mediation Session (Law 4640/2019).” Kluwer Mediation Blog, 20 January 2020. Accessed February 6, 2023. https://mediationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/01/20/greece-institutionalizing-mediation-through-mandatory-initial-mediation-session-law-4640–2019/.
Walker, Bret, and Andrew S. Bell. “Justice according to compulsory mediation: Supreme Court Amendment (Referral of Proceedings) Act 2000 (NSW).” Bar News: Journal of the NSW Bar Association, no. Spring 2000 (2000): 7–8.
Žukauskaitė-Tatorė, Miglė. “Problems of the relationship between mandatory mediation in civil disputes and the right to judicial protection.” PhD diss., Vilniaus Universitetas, 2021.
Zylstra, Alexandria. “The Road from Voluntary Mediation to Mandatory Good Faith Requirements: A Road Best Left Untraveled.” Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers 17, no. 1 (2001): 69–104.
Mykolas Romeris University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7834-2789
