Information about Mediation by lawyer and mediator Jes

Information about Mediation by lawyer and mediator Jes Anker Mikkelsen & lawyer and mediator Pia Deleuran Grand Hótel Reykjavík 30 August 2006

Definition u A voluntary and confidential method to resolve conflicts where, through a structured process, one or more impartial third parties help the parties to negotiate for the purpose of finding a solution which is satisfactory to both parties. The third party makes no decisions in the case. (Vibeke Vindelev, professor and LLD)

Two Different Styles of Conflict Resolution u The competitive model (negotiation) u The collaborative model (mediation)

Traditionel Mediation in Denmark The Danish Administration of Justice Act (Retsplejeloven): u § 268. I alle borgerlige domssager i første instans mægler retten forlig. u Stk. 2. Forligsmægling kan dog undlades, såfremt det på grund af sagens beskaffenhed, parternes forhold eller lignende omstændigheder på forhånd må antages, at mægling vil være forgæves. u Stk. 3. Mægling kan også foretages, når sagen er indbragt for højere instans. u Stk. 4. Undladelse af mægling kan ikke medføre hjemvisning af sagen.

The Dynamic in a Court Case Legal Demands

Dynamic in Mediation Interests Needs

Mediation as a Method to Resolve Conflicts Voluntary participation u The parties' autonomy u Guided communication u Focus on interests and needs instead of demands and legal claims u Focus on consensus instead of compromise u

A Scandinavian Non-Model by Vibeke Vindeløv, professor and LLD u A. Before the meeting u B. The meeting itself u C. After the meeting

The meeting itself u u u Opening: Welcoming, presentation of the mediation process and clarification of roles. Parties’ submissions and dialogue: Each party gives his side of the story. This leads to discovering the positions of the parties, facts, feelings, interests and needs. Definition of problem area: The topics that require further work are identified. Priorities may be set. Generation of possible solutions: As many proposals for a solution are generated as possible – without a view being taken on them. Negotiation of an agreement: The parties negotiate on the basis of the possible solutions. The agreement is checked and approved: The agreement is signed. Loose ends are tied up.

Conflict Ladder u Step 7. u Step 6. u Step 5. u Step 4. 3. 2. 1. Polarisation Open hostility Pictures of the ”enemy” are created Conversation is given up The problem escalates Personification Disagreement

Mediator Tools Techniques to get the parties to communicate u Open questions u Curiosity

Mediation Court Pilot Scheme u Project period: 1 March 2003 – ongoing u Participating courts: 4 city courts & 1 court of appeal u Participating court mediators: 3 judges and 3 lawyers from each court.

Evaluation from the Ministry of Justice Number Share Settlement percentage Average time of meeting Purchase 67 19 2, 8 57 Family matters 57 16 3, 9 63 Tender contracts 53 15 2, 5 72 Employment 36 10 3, 4 64 Leases, etc. 32 9 2, 4 59 Relations between neighbours 23 7 3, 6 48 Credit and monetary system 13 4 3 54 12 3 2, 8 75 11 3 2, 3 82 5 1 3, 1 60 Other case types 21 6 3, 2 86 No information on case type 22 6 - - 351 100 3 64 Contractual relations Damages Copyright, etc. Total

”US Postal” ”Employment Dispute Management” u Started in 1997 u Transformative mediation u 75% of all cases resolved u 90% satisfied with the process u 95% satisfied with the mediator

Relevant Questions Is mediation: u Faster? u Less expensive? u Better? u Relevant in all cases?

Further Information www. mediatoradvokater. dk Mediation lawyer and chairman Jes Anker Mikkelsen jam@bechbruun. com Mediation lawyer and court-mediator Pia Deleuran pd@deleuran. dk