In his Hamlyn Lecture, Lord Mackay
considered three alternative systems of mediation and examined the possibility
of annexing such schemes to the existing court system. One, involving lawyers
advising parties as to the legal strengths of their relative positions, he
rejected on the ground that it merely duplicated, without replacing or
extending, what was already available in the courts. A second, based on judges
adopting the role of mediators, he rejected on the ground that it might be seen
as undermining the traditional impartiality of the judiciary. The third type,
and the one that found most favour with him, broadened the issues beyond the
legal, to explore solutions that were not available to the court. His approval,
however, did not extend to financing such a system; the implication being that
public money should, and does, finance the civil justice system and that any
benefits that flow from a different system should be financed privately.
In March 1998, the LCD reported that
take up of the voluntary mediation procedure offered in the pilot schemes had
been fairly low. As regards the pilot scheme established in the Central London
County Court, a monitoring report found that only 5% of cases referred to the
ADR scheme actually took it up. However, in a morepositive mode, the report did
find that, in cases that did go to
mediation, 62% settled during the process, without going on to court. The
conclusion of the report was that mediation was capable of dealing with a wider
range of cases than might have been expected, including personal injury cases.
It also found that those who participated found the process satisfying and that
it led to outcomes that the parties generally found acceptable.
Conciliation
Conciliation
takes mediation a step further and gives the mediator the power to suggest
grounds for compromise and the possible basis for a conclusive agreement. Both
mediation and conciliation have been available in relation to industrial
disputes, under the auspices of the
government funded ACAS. One of the statutory functions of ACAS is to try to
resolve industrial disputes by means of discussion and negotiation, or, if the
parties agree, it might take a more active role as arbitrator in relation to a particular
dispute.
The essential weakness in the
procedures of mediation and conciliation lies in the fact that, although they
may lead to the resolution of a dispute, they do not necessarily achieve that
end. Where they operate successfully, they are excellent methods of dealing
with problems as, essentially, the parties to the dispute determine their own solutions
and, therefore, feel committed to the outcome. The problem is that they have no
binding power and do not always lead to an outcome.
0 comments:
Post a Comment