Zoekresultaat: 17 artikelen

x
Artikel

Vrijwillige rechtspraak: rechters op het mediationpad?

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden neighbourhood courts, mediation, friendly solutions, voluntary jurisdiction, de-escalation
Auteurs Prof. dr. Dick Allewijn
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A characteristic difference between administration of justice and mediation so far was the element of voluntariness on the side of the clients. Administration of justice however is, for the citizen who is brought before the courts, not voluntary. Recently pilots have been started in which citizens can turn voluntarily to the Court at low cost, and not far from their neighborhood. Judges will not primarily aim at making a decision in accordance with the law, but at finding friendly solutions. Does this mean that judges are going to mediate? And if so, how should this be appreciated? In this contribution attention is paid to certain aspects of this question. It is argued that differences between jurisdiction and mediation still remain. More than mediators judges must act within the legal framework. The extent to which they can engage in the emotional undercurrent of conflicts is limited. Confidence in the Court is from a different origin than trust in the mediator, and that also makes a difference. And finally, a judge is competent to make a binding judgment, which influences the way he or she is looked at by the parties.


Prof. dr. Dick Allewijn
Prof. dr. D. Allewijn is als bijzonder hoogleraar Mediation verbonden aan de Faculteit Rechten van de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam. Hij is tevens werkzaam als MfN-registermediator en trainer bij het Centrum voor Conflicthantering.

    Alternative/amicable dispute resolution (ADR) is omnipresent these days. In line with global evolutions, the Belgian legislator embraced the use of these ADR mechanisms. Recent reforms of the law, first in 2013 with the act concerning the introduction of a Family and Juvenile Court and consecutively in 2018 with the act containing diverse provisions regarding civil law with a view to the promotion of alternative forms of conflict resolution, implemented more far-reaching measures to promote ADR than ever before. The ultimate goal seems to alter our society’s way of conflict resolution and make the court the ultimum remedium in case all other options failed.In that respect, the legislator took multiple initiatives to stimulate amicable dispute resolution. The reform of 2013 focused solely on family cases, the one in 2018 was broader and designed for all civil cases. The legal tools consist firstly of an information provision regarding ADR for the family judge’s clerk, lawyers and bailiffs. The judges can hear parties about prior initiatives they took to resolve their conflict amicably and assess whether amicable solutions can still be considered, as well as explain these types of solutions and adjourn the case for a short period to investigate the possibilities of amicable conflict resolution. A legal framework has been created for a new method, namely collaborative law and the law also regulates the link between a judicial procedure and the methods of mediation and collaborative law to facilitate the transition between these procedures. Finally, within the Family Courts, specific ‘Chambers of Amicable Settlement’ were created, which framework is investigated more closely in this article. All of these legal tools are further discussed and assessed on their strengths and weaknesses.
    ---
    Alternatieve of minnelijke conflictoplossing is alomtegenwoordig. De Belgische wetgever heeft het gebruik van deze minnelijke oplossingsmethodes omarmd, in navolging van wereldwijde evoluties. Recente wetshervormingen implementeerden maatregelen ter promotie van minnelijke conflictoplossing die verder reiken dan ooit tevoren. Het betreft vooreerst de hervorming in 2013 met de wet betreffende de invoering van een familie- en jeugdrechtbank en vervolgens kwam er in 2018 de wet houdende diverse bepalingen inzake burgerlijk recht en bepalingen met het oog op de bevordering van alternatieve vormen van geschillenoplossing. De ultieme doelstelling van deze hervormingen is een mentaliteitswijziging omtrent onze wijze van conflictoplossing teweegbrengen, waarbij de rechtbank het ultimum remedium dient te worden nadat alle overige opties faalden.De wetshervorming van 2013 focuste uitsluitend op familiale materies, de hervorming van 2018 was ruimer en had alle burgerlijke zaken voor ogen. De wettelijke mogelijkheden bestaan vooreerst uit een informatieverstrekking omtrent minnelijke conflictoplossing in hoofde van de griffier van de familierechtbank, advocaten en gerechtsdeurwaarders. Rechters kunnen partijen horen omtrent eerdere ondernomen initiatieven om hun conflict op een minnelijke manier op te lossen, zij beoordelen of minnelijke oplossingen alsnog kunnen worden overwogen, zij kunnen de diverse minnelijke mogelijkheden toelichten aan partijen alsook de zaak voor een korte periode uitstellen om partijen toe te laten de mogelijkheden aan minnelijke conflictoplossing te verkennen. Er werd voorts een wetgevend kader uitgewerkt voor een nieuwe oplossingsmethode, namelijk de collaboratieve onderhandeling. De wet creëert tevens een link tussen een gerechtelijke procedure en de methodes van bemiddeling en collaboratieve onderhandeling, om de overgang tussen deze procedures te vereenvoudigen. Tot slot werden er binnen de familierechtbanken specifieke kamers voor minnelijke schikking opgericht, waarvan het wetgevend kader in detail wordt bestudeerd in dit artikel. Al deze wettelijke opties worden nader besproken en beoordeeld aan de hand van hun sterktes en zwaktes.


Sofie Raes
Sofie Raes is a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute for Family Law of the University of Ghent, where she researches alternative dispute resolution, with a focus on the chambers of amicable settlement in Family Courts. She is also an accredited mediator in family cases.
Artikel

Jonge daders: worstelen met sorry-zeggen

Is oprecht spijt betuigen doenlijk?

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Young offenders, Remorse, Sincerity, Perceptions-mismatch, victims
Auteurs Bas van Stokkom
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The apologies offered by young offenders in restorative justice conferences are often of poor quality. In this article the difficulties that accompany the offering of excuses are discussed. Offenders sometimes lack the language skills to pronounce an adequate apology, are anxious or insecure or believe that they have not been treated fairly. The mediation setting itself also has effects: sometimes perpetrators feel intimidated and feel compelled to say something that resembles an excuse. A related problem is that the perceptions about the sincerity of the apology can vary considerably. This perception-mismatch also occurs among victims: what one victim considers sincere is ‘fake’ for another. Many people
    – also advocates of restorative justice – trust that the offender will offer a sincere apology, without realizing that this is not self-evident in a thorny confrontation setting. This article aims to temper this sincerity-expectation.


Bas van Stokkom
Bas van Stokkom is hoofdredacteur van dit tijdschrift. Hij is verbonden aan de vaksectie Strafrecht & Criminologie, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Tot de thema’s die in zijn onderzoek aan bod komen, behoren politie, burgerschap en lokale veiligheidszorg, straftheorie en herstelrecht. www.basvanstokkom.nl

Annie de Roo
Annie de Roo is associate professor of ADR and comparative law at Erasmus University Law School in Rotterdam, editor-in-chief of TMD, and vice chair of the exams committee of the Mediators Federation of the Netherlands MFN. She has published extensively on mediation and has inter alia been a Rapporteur three times for the European Commission on the use of mediation in employment disputes.

Rob Jagtenberg
Rob Jagtenberg is senior research fellow at Erasmus University and has published frequently on the relationship between public and private justice. He has been involved in research commissioned by the Worldbank, the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary, and various Dutch Ministries including the MoJ funded national project on court-connected mediation.
Artikel

Mediation case law in Germany – an overview

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Case law, Germany, Voluntariness, Confidentiality, Neutrality
Auteurs Ulla Gläßer
Auteursinformatie

Ulla Gläßer
Prof. Dr. Ulla Gläßer, LL.M., holds a full professorship of mediation, conflict management and procedural theory at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder)/Germany. She is academic director of the Institute for Conflict Management and the postgraduate, interdisciplinary Master’s Program on Mediation at the European University. Ms Gläßer is teaching mediation, negotiation and conflict management skills at various universities and numerous other institutions in Germany and abroad. She has published broadly on mediation methodology, the legal framework of mediation, quality assurance of mediation and other ADR procedures and the establishment of mediation and ADR procedures in different realms of society. She also is editor of two Publication Series on Mediation and Conflict Management and a comprehensive commentary on the German Mediation Act and corresponding relevant regulation. As a practical mediator and facilitator, Ms Gläßer supports dispute resolution and decision making processes within or between organisations/corporations.
Artikel

Mediation on trial: Dutch court judgments on mediation

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Case law, The Netherlands, Voluntariness, Confidentiality
Auteurs Annie de Roo en Rob Jagtenberg
Auteursinformatie

Annie de Roo
Annie de Roo is associate professor of ADR and comparative law at Erasmus University Law School in Rotterdam, editor-in-chief of TMD, and vice chair of the exams committee of the Mediators Federation of the Netherlands MFN. She has published extensively on mediation and has inter alia been a Rapporteur three times for the European Commission on the use of mediation in employment disputes.

Rob Jagtenberg
Rob Jagtenberg is senior research fellow at Erasmus University and has published frequently on the relationship between public and private justice. He has been involved in research commissioned by the Worldbank, the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary, and various Dutch Ministries including the MoJ funded national project on court-connected mediation.
Article

Access_open A World Apart? Private Investigations in the Corporate Sector

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2016
Trefwoorden Corporate security, private investigations, private troubles, public/private differentiation
Auteurs Clarissa Meerts
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article explores the investigative methods used by corporate security within organisations concerned about property misappropriation by their own staff and/or others. The research methods are qualitative: interviews, observations and case studies carried out between October 2012 and November 2015. The findings include that, even though corporate investigators do not have the formal investigative powers enjoyed by police and other public agencies, they do have multiple methods of investigation at their disposal, some of which are less used by public investigative agencies, for example the in-depth investigation of internal systems. Corporate investigators also rely heavily on interviews, the investigation of documentation and financial administration and the investigation of communication devices and open sources. However, there are many additional sources of information (for example, site visits or observations), which might be available to corporate investigators. The influences from people from different backgrounds, most notably (forensic) accountants, (former) police officers, private investigators and lawyers, together with the creativity that is necessary (and possible) when working without formal investigative powers, make corporate security a diverse field. It is argued that these factors contribute to a differentiation between public and private actors in the field of corporate security.


Clarissa Meerts
Clarissa Meerts, MSc., is a PhD student at the Criminology Department of the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

A Distorted Mediation Landscape: Judicial Mediation in the Chinese Civil Courts

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Chinese civil justice, Mediating civil and commercial disputes in China, Comparative civil procedure, Judicial behaviour in Chinese civil courts
Auteurs Peter Chan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Mediation plays a critical role in the development of any civil justice system. The positive effects of mediation could only manifest if the process is protected in ways that allow parties to truly be able to choose what is best in their interests and explore options free from interference from anyone else. The Chinese legal culture, coupled with a systemic distortion of the function of mediation during the period between March 2008 and March 2013, made it very difficult to develop an authentic mediation system that places party autonomy and other core principles at the heart of the process. As much as the leaders of the Supreme People’s Court today are aware of the need to strengthen the courts role in declaring legal norms and enforcing rights, it is argued that courts (especially lower courts) are likely to continue to use judicial mediation for institutional or strategic purposes.


Peter Chan
Peter Chan is Assistant Professor, School of Law, City University of Hong Kong. He received his PhD in June 2016 from Maastricht University under the supervision of Prof. dr. C.H. van Rhee.
Artikel

Peer_reviewedAccess_open The way to mediation in Belgian administrative procedural law

Tijdschrift Netherlands Administrative Law Library, februari 2016
Auteurs Lise Vandenhende, Brecht Warnez en Prof.dr. Ludo Veny
Samenvatting

    Given the rise of mediation in other legal disciplines and the influence of the EU, the call for mediation is increasing in Belgian administrative practice. Several years ago, the legislature took the first steps towards mediation in the judicial administrative procedure. This contribution is a study of the existing forms of mediation with its limitations and possibilities. Taking these findings into account, a possible mediation framework, applicable in the Belgian legal system, is proposed.


Lise Vandenhende

Brecht Warnez

Prof.dr. Ludo Veny
Artikel

Vrijwilligheid, vertrouwelijkheid en onpartijdigheid

Opvattingen van deelnemers aan herstelbemiddeling in Vlaanderen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 2 2015
Trefwoorden Herstelbemiddeling, werkingsprincipes, onpartijdigheid, vrijwilligheid, vertrouwelijkheid
Auteurs Vicky De Mesmaecker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article considers the fundamental restorative justice principles of voluntary participation, the impartiality of the facilitator and the confidentiality of the restorative process from the point of view of participants to victim-offender mediation in Flanders, Belgium. These principles have remained relatively theoretical; little is known about how they are perceived by the participants to restorative practices. Results of our study show that whereas victims and offenders unequivocally support the principles of voluntariness and impartiality, the principle of confidentiality causes dissatisfaction and frustration when they believe it hinders the judge trying the case in court from establishing the truth about the facts.


Vicky De Mesmaecker
Vicky De Mesmaecker behaalde een doctoraat en master in de Criminologische Wetenschappen en een master in de Internationale Betrekkingen en Conflictbeheersing aan de KU Leuven (België). Zij werkte als doctoraal en postdoctoraal onderzoeker aan het Leuvens Instituut voor Criminologie (LINC) van de KU Leuven en als Visiting Researcher aan Yale Law School in de Verenigde Staten en het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving in Nederland. Zij werkt momenteel als Senior Qualitative Researcher bij GfK Belgium.
Article

Access_open Legal Assistance and Police Interrogation

(Problematic Aspects of) Dutch Criminal Procedure in Relation to European Union and the Council of Europe

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2014
Trefwoorden Legal assistance, police interrogation, Dutch Criminal Proceedings, EU Directive
Auteurs Paul Mevis en Joost Verbaan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper discusses the rise of a fundamental issue in Dutch criminal proceedings. The presence of a lawyer prior to and during police interrogations has for a long time been a matter open for debate in the Netherlands. Allowing legal assistance during and prior to police interrogations has been researched on several occasions in the previous century and the beginning of this century. In the Netherlands, one of the most important reasons for not admitting legal assistance was and is founded in the confident reliance on the professionalism and integrity of police officers and justice officials in dealing with the interests of suspects. However, after the Salduz case (ECHR 27 November 2008, Appl. No. 36391/02, Salduz v. Turkey), the Dutch government was compelled to draft legal provisions in order to facilitate legal assistance during and prior to police interrogations. The initial drafts still contained a hesitant approach on admitting the lawyer to the actual interrogation. The EU-Directive of November 2013 (Pb EU 2013, L249) set out further reaching standards compelling the Dutch government to create new drafts. In a ruling of April 2014, the Dutch Supreme Court (ECLI:NL:2014:770) argued that the judgements of the ECtHR were too casuistic to derive an absolute right to have a lawyer present during police interrogation. However, they urged the legislator to draft legislation on this matter and warned that its judgement in this could be altered in future caused by legal developments. The Dutch legislator already proposed new draft legislation in February. In this paper it is examined whether the provisions of the new drafts meet the standards as set out in the EU-Directive as well as by the ECtHR.


Paul Mevis
Paul Mevis is Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure at the Faculty of Law of the Erasmus. He has been a visiting professor at the universities of Münster, Mmabato (South Africa) and in Moldavia, the Ukrain and in Frankfurt an der Oder. Besides his academic activities, Paul Mevis is Honorary Judge at the Criminal Court of Rotterdam and Honorary Judge at the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam, since 1994 and 1998 respectively. He has been parttime Judge at the Court of Arnhem (1990-1994) and is member of the Commission of Supervision of prisons (2006-2008). Paul Mevis is also member of the board of editors of several journals in the field of criminal law and human rights law and commentator for the journal ‘Nederlandse Jurisprudentie’ on criminal cases. He was chairman of the ‘Commissie Strafvordelijke gegevensvergaring in de informatiemaatschappij’ (2000-2001), of which the report has lead to the Bill of the same name. He is a member of the School of Human Rights Research and the Research School on Safety and Security in Society.

Joost Verbaan
Mr. J.H.J. (Joost) Verbaan is an assistant-professor at the Erasmus School of Law of the Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. He teaches Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure law. Mr. Verbaan is the Managing Director of the Erasmus Center for Police Studies (ECPS). The ECPS organises courses on criminal and criminal procedure law for law enforcement agencies as well as the prosecution. Mr. Verbaan has been involved in many researches in the practical field of investigation. He has taken part in the research for the Governmental Institute of Scientific Research and Documentation on the effects of the presence of an attorney during the first police interrogation.For the same institute together with professor Mevis he researched the Modalities of Serving in comparative law perspective.He served the secretary of the Committee to draft a new Dutch Antillean Criminal Code and served the secretary of the Committee to draft a new Criminal Code for Aruba, Sint Maarten and Curacao. He served the secretary of the Committee to Draft a common Criminal Procedure Code in the Caribbean regions of Aruba, Curacao , Sint Maarten and the BES-territories. In the republic of Surinam Mr. Verbaan has worked in the legal advisory board of the Committee founded in order to codify a new Criminal Code for the republic of Surinam.

    Giuseppe De Palo and Romina Canessa give a description of the recent publication of a study conducted for the European Parliament on Mediation, ‘Rebooting the Mediation Directive: Assessing the Limited Impact of its Implementation and Proposing Measures to Increase the Number of Mediations in the EU’, has contributed to the ongoing debate about effective mediation policy. The Study concluded that despite an increase in mediation awareness and the proven benefits it can have, mediation still remains largely unused as a method of dispute resolution.


Giuseppe De Palo
Giuseppe De Palo is a mediator and President of ADR Center in Rome. He is also Professor of ADR Law & Practice at Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minn. He has written extensively about ADR and, in January 2014, presented to the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament the research study ‘Rebooting the Mediation Directive: Assessing the Limited Impact of its Implementation and Proposing Measures to Increase the Number of Mediations in the EU’, of which he was the coordinator.

Romina Canessa
Romina Canessa is a co-author of ‘Rebooting the Mediation Directive: Assessing the Limited Impact of its Implementation and Proposing Measures to Increase the Number of Mediations in the EU’. She holds a Juris Doctor Degree in Law from Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and Bachelor of Science Degree in International Politics from the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.
Artikel

Mediation options for resolving commercial disputes in China: A guide for foreign enterprises

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging, Aflevering 2 2012
Trefwoorden Chinese law, Chinese civil procedure, Chinese commercial dispute resolution, mediation, ADR
Auteurs P.C.H. Chan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Consistent with the state’s policy of promoting mediation, commercial disputes in China are frequently settled through mediation. As a foreign enterprise doing business in China, it is important to understand the nature and practice of commercial mediation.
    The article introduces foreign enterprises to the Chinese court system and arbitration regime and the position of mediation within the country’s commercial dispute resolution context. It highlights the practical aspects and potential pitfalls of commercial mediation in China.
    Mediation of commercial disputes may occur during a lawsuit (court mediation) or arbitration proceedings (med-arb). It may also occur as private mediation through independent institutions


P.C.H. Chan
P.C.H. Chan is Teaching Fellow at the School of Law of the City University of Hong Kong, solicitor, HKSAR, and solicitor, England & Wales.
Artikel

Mediation Law in Germany

A major move or the end of flexibility?

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden German Mediation Code, confidentiality, duties of disclosure, limitation periods
Auteurs Renate Dendorfer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the contribution ‘Mediation Law in Germany’ Renate Dendorfer discusses the background and contents of the ‘German Code for Promotion of Mediation and other Proceedings of Alternative Dispute Resolution’ in light of the implementation of the EU Mediation Directive. Important issues such as duties of the mediator, confidentiality, and training and education are focused on.


Renate Dendorfer
Prof. dr. Renate Dendorfer LL.M. MBAHeussen Rechtsanwaltgesellschaft mbH, Munich.
Artikel

The DIS Mediation Rules

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden mediation, alternative dispute resolution, consensual
Auteurs Prof. dr. Stephan Breidenbach en Dr. Holger Peres
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    As a consensual dispute resolution method, mediation is gaining ever more practical significance. Above all, businesses are beginning to understand that mediation poses little risk of failure, while offering a realistic chance of continuing, and in some cases even developing, business relationships. To meet real-life demands, the German Institution of Arbitration (DIS) now provides new mediation rules as part of a whole set of new dispute resolution rules.


Prof. dr. Stephan Breidenbach
Stephan Breidenbach is a tenured professor of civil law, law of civil procedure, and international business law at Europe University Viadrina in Frankfurt (Oder), Germany. He contributed to the design of the DIS dispute resolution system.

Dr. Holger Peres
Holger Peres is an attorney and partner at BEITEN BURKHARDT Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH in Munich, Germany. He contributed to the design of the DIS dispute resolution system.

Prof. mr. J.E. Doek

Stephen Waddams
Goodman/Schipper Professor of Law, University of Toronto.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.