Grand Hótel Reykjavík 30 August 2006

1. Information about Mediationby lawyer and mediator Jes Anker Mikkelsen & lawyer and mediator Pia Deleuran Grand Hótel Reykjavík 30 August 2006

2. Definition • 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)

3. Two Different Stylesof Conflict Resolution • The competitive model (negotiation) • The collaborative model (mediation)

4. Traditionel Mediation in Denmark The Danish Administration of Justice Act (Retsplejeloven): • § 268. I alle borgerlige domssager i første instans mægler retten forlig. • 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. • Stk. 3. Mægling kan også foretages, når sagen er indbragt for højere instans. • Stk. 4. Undladelse af mægling kan ikke medføre hjemvisning af sagen.

5. The Dynamic in a Court Case Legal Demands

6. Dynamic in Mediation Interests Needs

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

8. A Scandinavian Non-Modelby Vibeke Vindeløv, professor and LLD • A. Before the meeting • B. The meeting itself • C. After the meeting

9. The meeting itself • 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.

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

11. Mediator Tools Techniques to get the parties to communicate • Open questions • Curiosity

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

13. Evaluation fromthe Ministry of Justice

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

15. Relevant Questions Is mediation: • Faster? • Less expensive? • Better? • Relevant in all cases?

16. 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