Zoekresultaat: 68 artikelen

x
Law Review

2019/1 EELC’s review of the year 2018

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2019
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Filip Dorssemont e.a.
Samenvatting

    For the second time, various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Catherine Barnard

Filip Dorssemont

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Francesca Maffei

Niklas Bruun

Anthony Kerr

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Daiva Petrylaite

Andrej Poruban

Stein Evju

    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

An Introduction to the Singapore Convention on Mediation – Perspectives from Singapore

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2018
Trefwoorden Singapore Convention, Dispute resolution, Uncitral, Enforcement
Auteurs Nadja Alexander en Shouyu Chong
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Following a retrospective of the road towards the Convention, incorporating some Singaporean inside views, the authors provide a detailed analysis of the envisaged grounds for refusal of mediated settlements. The authors also highlight various issues around the very concept, and proof, of mediation. These issues are fundamental, as only settlements ensuing from mediation are covered. Another significant aspect is the absence of any provisions pertaining to the status of agreements to mediate, the contract situated at the entry side of mediation.


Nadja Alexander
Nadja Alexander is Professor of Law (Practice) at Singapore Management University School of Law and Director of the Singapore International Dispute Resolution Academy (‘SIDRA’). She may be contacted at nadjaa@smu.edu.sg.

Shouyu Chong
Shouyu Chong is a Researcher at SIDRA, and may be contacted at sychong.2013@smu.edu.sg.

    This paper starts by reviewing empirical research that threatens law and economics’ initial success. This research has demonstrated that the functioning of the law cannot be well understood based on the assumption of the rational actor and that policies which are based on this assumption are likely to be flawed. Subsequently, three responses to this criticism are discussed. Whereas the first response denounces this criticism by maintaining that the limitations attributed to the rational actor can easily be incorporated in rational choice theory, the second response welcomes the criticism as an opportunity to come up with an integrative theory of law and behavior. The third response also takes the criticism seriously but replaces the aspiration to come up with such an integrative theory by a context-sensitive approach. It will be argued that the first two responses fall short while the third response offers a promising way to go forward.


Peter Mascini
Prof. dr. P. Mascini, Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    With a Belgian law of June, 18 2018, the principle of the voluntary nature of mediation was affected. A lot of critical comments can be made at this point. The scope of the obligation is not clear. Mandatory mediation raises the threshold to the court and has as effect that many cases are not handled in the most appropriate way. The bar doesn’t support the measure. Research is needed to find out if the new measure is justified.


Tom Wijnant
Tom Wijnant is assistent en doctoraatsonderzoeker aan de UGent. Zijn onderzoek legt de nadruk op de optimalisering van bemiddeling in België, met een focus op de faciliterende rol van de advocatuur.
Artikel

Access_open De Belgische evenwichtsoefening inzake de verplichte ADR-poging in het raam van een gerechtelijke procedure

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden mandatory mediation, access tot justice, Belgian Council of State, ADR legislation june 18 2018
Auteurs Eric Lancksweerdt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution examines how, when establishing the new Belgian legislation on the promotion of ADR, a delicate balance was sought between proponents and opponents of mandatory mediation. The Belgian government was in favour of compulsory mediation, but the Council of State, the High Council of Justice, members of parliament from the majority and the opposition, and representatives of professional organizations were opposed to it. A delicate compromise was found whereby the judge can impose a mediation, but if both sides are opposed to it, a mandatory mediation attempt is excluded.


Eric Lancksweerdt
Eric Lancksweerdt is hoofddocent aan de UHasselt en praktijkassistent aan de UAntwerpen. Zijn onderzoeksdomeinen zijn alternatieve conflictoplossing, burgerparticipatie, rechtspraktijk en ethiek, menselijke kwaliteiten in een juridische context.

    Recently, a new law with articles concerning mandatory mediation was approved in Belgium. From January 1st, 2019, the judge will be able to refer parties to mediation on a mandatory basis. This article considers if mandatory mediation is a realistic and feasible track in Belgium, focusing on the evolution of alternative dispute resolution in Belgium and in the European Union. The first part will define mediation in Belgium, followed by an analysis of the articles concerning mandatory mediation of the newly passed law. The article will also have a gander at Belgian legal developments to see which initiatives have already been taken towards mandatory dispute resolution. To conclude, an assessment is made if mandatory mediation is a realistic and feasible track in light of the existing evolutions of ADR in Belgium.


Céline Jaspers
Céline Jaspers is doctoraatsbursaal aan de UHasselt. Voordien was zij advocaat-stagiair. Zij behaalde een LLM ‘Dispute Resolution’ aan Pepperdine University. Momenteel bereidt zij een proefschrift voor over ‘De verplichte ADR-poging in scheidingssituaties’.
Artikel

Promoting Conciliation and Mediation in Collective Labour Conflicts in Europe

Celebrating 50 years of Federal Mediation Services in Belgium

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Mediation, conciliation, collective labour conflict, strikes
Auteurs Ana Belén García, Erica Pender, Francisco J. Medina e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    On 23 April 2018, the Belgian Ministry of Labour, together with a consortium of 12 European research institutes, held a symposium on the current state of the art and best practices for conciliation and mediation in collective labour conflicts within the European Union, and particularly in Belgium. The symposium was organized for two occasions. First, the 50st anniversary of the Belgium law, providing mediation services by the Ministry of Labour to prevent and mediate in collective labour conflicts. Second, the presentation of the results of an EU (DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion) sponsored project in 12 EU member states.
    The management of collective labour conflicts is in all countries regulated differently. The study shows that also practices of third party intervention differ largely. Most countries differentiate conciliation (a relative informal process of facilitated negotiation), mediation (usually defined as a strong involvement of the third party, who gives recommendations to the parties), and arbitration. Mediators typically are not trained, certified or registered as mediators in most countries. In all countries there is a large potential for conciliation, particularly in early stages of conflict (preventive mediation), as well as in rebuilding of trust after conflict episodes. More details in open access book: Mediation in collective labor conflicts (Springer, 2018).


Ana Belén García
Ana Belén García is senior researcher at the University of Seville and KU Leuven, working in the departments of work and organizational psychology. She was coordinator of several EU funded research programs on social dialogue in organisations. The most recent project was on mediation in collective labor conflicts in 12 EU member states. Ana’s interest is on conflict management and mediation in organizations. She was editor of two handbooks in the Springer Series ‘Industrial relations and conflict management’. Ana holds a PhD in Psychology and HRM from the University of Seville and KU Leuven. She is also a registered mediator.

Erica Pender
Erica Pender is a mediator and senior researcher at the University of Seville and KU Leuven in the department of Work and Organizational Psychology. She holds a PhD in Psychology from the University of Seville and KU Leuven focusing on trust and trustworthiness in organizations. After studying psychology at the University of Seville, she obtained her MSc at Maastricht University. She has coordinated two large-scale projects for the European Commission, and was co-editor of two handbooks in the Springer Series ‘Industrial relations and conflict management’.

Francisco J. Medina
Fransisco J. Medina is professor in social and organizational psychology, and Dean of the Faculty of Psychology and Educational sciences, at the University of Seville, Spain. His interests are conflict management, mediation and organizational development. He is engaged for many years in the development of labor mediation in Spain, providing training for mediators. He is also an experienced consultant and mediator. Francisco published both internationally and in Spanish extensively on conflict management and mediation.

Martin Euwema
Martin Euwema is professor in organizational psychology, and chair of the research group Organizational and Occupational Psychology and Professional Learning at KU Leuven, Belgium. He is also co-director of the Leuven Center for Collaborative Management and visiting professor at University of Copenhagen, IESEG-Paris, Sevilla, and Tsinghua (Beijing). He has extensive experience as consultant and mediator for both profit and non-profit organizations. His fields of expertise are conflict management, mediation, leadership, and organizational and team development.
Artikel

Access_open Over meelifters, gelukzoekers en rechters die problemen maken als partijen die niet hebben

Beschouwingen naar aanleiding van de Fortis/Ageas-schikking

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Ondernemingsrecht, Aflevering 5-6 2018
Trefwoorden massaschade, WCAM-schikking, freeriders, belangenbehartigers
Auteurs Mr. M.L.A. Rijndorp en Mr. I. Tillema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In juni 2017 heeft het Gerechtshof Amsterdam beslist dat het (eerste) schikkingsvoorstel in de Fortis/Ageas-zaak niet verbindend kan worden verklaard. De auteurs bespreken het voorstel en de tussenbeschikking en duiden deze binnen het kader van het freeriderprobleem. Daarnaast bespreken zij het huidige juridische kader voor (toetsing van) de vergoeding aan belangenbehartigers en werpen zij enkele aandachtspunten op voor de verdere ontwikkeling daarvan.


Mr. M.L.A. Rijndorp
Mr. M.L.A. Rijndorp is student-assistent aan de Erasmus School of Law van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Mr. I. Tillema
Mr. I. Tillema is promovenda aan de Erasmus School of Law van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Administering Justice and Serving the People

The Tension between the Objective of Judicial Efficiency and Informal Justice in Canadian Access to Justice Initiatives

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden access to justice, procedural law, courts, civil justice reform, comparative law
Auteurs Catherine Piché
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Canada has a complex system of courts that seek to serve Canadians in view of the traditional objectives of civil justice – principally accessibility, efficiency, fairness, efficacy, proportionality and equality. The Canadian court system is generally considered by its users to work well and to have legitimacy. Yet, researchers have found that ‘there is a tendency for people involved in a civil case to become disillusioned about the ability of the system to effect a fair and timely resolution to a civil justice problem’. This article will discuss the ways in which reforms of procedural law and civil justice have originated and continue to be made throughout Canada, both nationally and provincially, as well as the trends and influences in making these reforms. With hundreds of contemporary procedural reforms having been discussed, proposed and/or completed since the first days of Canadian colonisation on a national basis and in the Canadian provinces and territory, providing a detailed analysis will prove challenging. This article will nonetheless provide a review of civil justice and procedural reform issues in Canada, focusing principally, at the provincial level, on the systems of Ontario and Quebec. Importantly, I will seek to reconcile the increasing willingness to have an economically efficient civil justice and the increased power of judges in managing cases, with our court system’s invasion of ADR and its prioritisation of informal modes of adjudication.


Catherine Piché
Dr. Prof. Catherine Piché, Université de Montreal.
Artikel

Access_open Sincere Apologies

The Importance of the Offender’s Guilt Feelings

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Sincerity of emotions, Guilt, Feelings, Apology, Offender
Auteurs Margreet Luth-Morgan DPhil Oxon, MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper discusses the meaning and the importance of emotions, in particular the sincere guilt feelings of the offender. It is argued that the emotion of guilt reveals important information about the offender’s values and normative position. In the remainder of the paper, special consideration is awarded to the argument concerning ritual apologies, which might contain value even when insincere. This argument is rejected, on two grounds: 1. if the apology ritual does not aim for sincere guilt feelings, then the use of the symbol of apology is not fitting; and 2. if the apology ritual does aim for sincere guilt, then an insincere apology devalues the sincere expression.


Margreet Luth-Morgan DPhil Oxon, MA
Margreet Luth-Morgan is universitair docent aan Erasmus School of Law, sectie Sociologie, Theorie en Methodologie, Rotterdam.

Elisabetta Silvestri
Elisabetta Silvestri is Associate Professor of Italian Civil Procedure and Comparative Civil Procedure; Scientific Director of the postgraduate program on Mediation and ADR, Department of Law, University of Pavia. Co-Director of the annual seminar ‘Public and Private Justice’, Inter-University Centre, Dubrovnik, Croatia; member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Almo Collegio Borromeo, Pavia. She graduated from the University of Pavia and received a LL.M. degree from Cornell Law School. She is a member of the European Law Institute and the International Association of Procedural Law. She has written on Italian civil procedure and a variety of topics in the field of comparative procedure. She has lectured extensively in Italy and abroad; she is a member of one of the Working Groups established by the European Law Institute and UNIDROIT for the development of the project ‘From Transnational Principles to European Rules of Civil Procedure’.

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.

Bryan Clark
Bryan Clark is a Professor and former Head of School in the Law School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK. He is a socio-legal scholar and commercial lawyer with interests particularly in the fields of mediation and its interaction with the law, courts, civil justice and the workings of judges and lawyers. He has published widely in these fields and presented a wide range of papers at national and international conferences and seminars. He is Chair of the Accreditation and Validation of Relationships Scotland, Academic Committee Member of the English Civil Mediation Council, Board Member of the Asian Mediation Centre and former Board Member of Scottish Mediation.
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.
Artikel

ADR Clauses and International Perceptions: A Preliminary Report

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden ADR, Dispute resolution clauses, Questionnaire, commercial contracts
Auteurs Maryam Salehijam
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article provides a preliminary analysis of the 622 responses to a questionnaire conducted in the context of Maryam Salehijam’s PhD research which focuses on commercial parties’ agreement to mediate/conciliate. The questionnaire targeted ADR professionals and experts with experience in drafting, inserting, or enforcing dispute resolution clauses that provide for non-binding ADR mechanisms. Some of the key findings include that it is still not very common for commercial contracts to conclude agreements to mediate/conciliate. This begs the question of why the parties and/or their legal advisors do not conclude such agreements as regularly as agreements to arbitrate. Moreover, the questionnaire confirmed that there is widespread practice in contract drafting to copy and paste dispute resolution clauses. This practice is shocking in light of the rising number of cases in which the parties dis­agree regarding the binding nature of their dispute resolution clause.


Maryam Salehijam
Maryam Salehijam is a PhD Researcher at the University of Ghent (Transnational Law Centre), LL.M. International Laws (Maastricht University) and LL.B. European Law (Maastricht University).
Artikel

Enforceability of mediation clauses in Belgium and the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden Enforceability, Mediation clauses, contracts
Auteurs Ellen van Beukering-Rosmuller en Patrick Van Leynseele
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article authors discuss (possible) legal means and methods aimed at making mediation clauses effective and/or enforceable. In particular Belgian and Dutch law are examined. In part attention is also paid to English, French and Italian law. Against the background of recent EU-legislation the validity of mediation clauses is discussed as well, with a focus on consumer related disputes. By reviewing US case law with regard to the duty to participate in good faith in the mediation process, the authors also outline the limits of this concept for the effectiveness of mediation clauses. The central theme of the enforceability of mediation clauses has been looked at both from a procedural as from a financial angle. Substantial differences can be noted between the Belgian and the Dutch approach towards what courts should do when dealing with a dispute in which parties have previously agreed to mediation. Belgian law provides in art. 1725 § 2 Judicial Code that the court, if so requested by the defendant, is in principle obliged to suspend the examination of the case until the mediation has taken place. According to current case law, the situation in the Netherlands is that mediation clauses are in principle not enforceable (Supreme Court 2006). Following the most recent legislative proposal regarding mediation (July 2016) the court should examine whether mediation can still have an added value in case one party refuses to take part in a mediation as provided for in a clause invoked by the other party, prior to (possibly) proposing mediation. Based on the plans repeatedly announced by the Belgian Minister of Justice, it is likely that there will soon be an amendment to the mediation provisions in the Judicial Code that will allow courts to ‘force’ mediation upon the parties, even in the absence of a mediation clause. If this becomes the rule, judges would be well advised to exercise this power with due care. In the authors’ opinion the Dutch approach (as suggested in the most recent legislative proposal) in connection with mediation clauses, consisting in having the court examine whether mediation may (still) have an added value for the parties, could serve as a good guideline for the Belgian judges to use.


Ellen van Beukering-Rosmuller
Ellen J.M. van Beukering-Rosmuller is Universitair Docent Burgerlijk Procesrecht, Universiteit Leiden, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid.

Patrick Van Leynseele
Patrick H. Van Leynseele is lid van de balies van Brussel en New York en partner in het Brussels advocatenkantoor DALDEWOLF, een referentie inzake ADR. Met als achtergrond het ondernemingsrecht werkt hij als litigator en arbiter in internationale zaken. Hij schreef verschillende artikels inzake mediation en Med-Arb in vooraanstaande juridische tijdschriften.

    Ongeveer 20% van de echtscheidingen loopt uit op een zogenaamde conflict- of vechtscheiding. Om deze complexe echtscheidingszaken effectief aan te pakken, dienen professionals in het veld te beschikken over wetenschappelijk onderbouwde kennis over werkzame interventies. Mediation wordt vaak beschouwd als dé oplossing voor conflictscheidingen. Wetenschappelijk onderzoek laat echter een beperkte effectiviteit zien van mediation bij conflictscheidingen. Dit heeft onder andere te maken met de hoge prevalentie (rond 40%) van huiselijk geweld in conflictscheidingsgezinnen.
    In dit onderzoek is de visie van Nederlandse professionals over conflictscheidingen onderzocht en vergeleken met de kennis uit de wetenschappelijke literatuur. Met behulp van een online vragenlijst testten we het kennisniveau van 863 professionals die werken met conflictscheidingsgezinnen. Dit waren advocaten, professionals uit de jeugdzorg/-bescherming, mediators en professionals uit de GGZ.
    Professionals behaalden een gemiddelde score van 6,5 correcte antwoorden op een totaal van 11, waarbij juridische professionals significant beter scoorden dan sociale professionals. Slechts 17% van de professionals wist dat in bijna de helft van de conflictscheidingen huiselijk geweld een rol speelt. 55% van de professionals adviseerde in een geval van een al 7 jaar durende conflictscheiding mediation als effectieve interventie. 46% van de respondenten overschatte de prevalentie van valse beschuldigingen van huiselijk geweld en kindermishandeling bij conflictscheidingen.
    In opleidingen voor Nederlandse juridische en sociale professionals die werken met conflictscheidingsgezinnen dient meer aandacht besteed te worden aan wetenschappelijke kennis, zodat professionals handelen op basis van kennis in plaats van persoonlijke opvattingen en mythen.
    ---
    High conflict divorces are among the 20% of divorce cases that continue to escalate over time. In order to help solve these complex divorce cases, it is important that professionals in the field possess evidence-based knowledge to provide effective interventions. One of these possible interventions is mediation, which is often seen as a panacea for high-conflict divorce (HCD) cases. However, scientific research has shown limited effectiveness of mediation in HCD cases. This is partially associated with the high prevalence (around 40%) of domestic violence in HCD.
    The present study examined professionals’ perspectives on high conflict-divorce cases and compared their views with the available scientific evidence. By means of a web-survey, we tested the knowledge of different professional groups (N = 863) who work with HCD families. The sample consisted of lawyers, child welfare/child protection professionals, mediators and mental health professionals.
    The results showed that professionals on average gave 6.5 correct responses out of 11 questions in total and that legal professionals scored significantly better than social professionals. Only 17% of the professionals were aware that in almost half of all high-conflict divorce cases domestic violence is a problem. For a high-conflict divorce case spanning 7 years, mediation was advised as an effective intervention by 55% of professionals. 46% of respondents overestimated the prevalence of false allegations of child abuse in HCD cases.
    More attention to scientific knowledge on HCD in the educational curricula for Dutch legal and social professionals is needed, in order to assure that their professional activities and decision making are based on scientific evidence instead of personal biases and myths.


Prof. dr. Corine de Ruiter
Prof. dr. Corine de Ruiter is a licensed clinical psychologist (BIG) in The Netherlands. She serves as professor of Forensic Psychology at Maastricht University. She also has a private practice. Her research focuses on the interface between psychopathology and crime. She has a special interest in the prevention of child abuse and intimate partner violence because they are both very common and often overlooked in practice.

Brigitte van Pol Msc
Brigitte van Pol studied Psychology and Law at Maastricht University. Her involvement in this research dates from her Master’s thesis on the role of mediation in high conflict divorce. The authors would like to thank the participants for their time and effort in completing our websurvey.
Artikel

Conciliation Between Lawyer and Client (Consumer) at the Czech Bar Association

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden Legal fees, Consumer dispute, Czech Republic, Czech Bar Association, Professional secret
Auteurs Martina Doležalová
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The 2013/11/EU Directive on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes has forced the bar authorities in all European countries to think about the implementation of a dispute resolution mechanism to handle disputes between lawyers and their clients. The fear, if not done, would be that disputes between lawyers and clients would fall into the general consumer dispute resolution mechanisms, which many felt would not be adapted to the peculiarities of disputes between lawyers and clients, in particular concerning the proper respect of professional secrecy. Hence the need for the bars to develop their own system. The Czech Bar Association has been among the first to propose such mechanism to the Ministry of Industry and Trade. This article describes the broad outlines of the system.


Martina Doležalová
Martina Doležalová, PhD., is a lawyer and registered mediator, conciliator in consumer disputes, head of the ADR section at the Czech Bar Association.
Artikel

Herstelrecht bij partnergeweld

Resultaten van een Europees onderzoek

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 4 2016
Auteurs Annemieke Wolthuis en Katinka Lünnemann
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Restorative Justice is not evident in cases of intimate partner violence, but it can take and does take place under certain conditions. Wolthuis and Lünnemann explain about the European research they coordinated in six European countries (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, the Netherlands and the UK) on context and practicalities of the use of victim-offender mediation in such complex cases. Cases dealing with violence of mainly men against women and where power imbalances often play a role. That means that mediators, referrers and others involved should know about this complexity and the needs of participants. Austria and Finland turned out to have the most experienced working methods. Their models, good practices and challenges are presented as well as the main outcomes of the research. Interviews and focus groups in the countries gave additional insights. It resulted in a guide with minimum standards addressing the different stages of a mediation process with extra attention for safety and empowerment.


Annemieke Wolthuis
Annemieke Wolthuis is zelfstandig onderzoeker, trainer en mediator. Zij is tevens redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht.

Katinka Lünnemann
Katinka Lünnemann is als senior-onderzoeker verbonden aan het Verwey-Jonker Instituut.
Toont 1 - 20 van 68 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4
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.