Wendy Hensen analyzes the current Belgian legislation on tax mediation from the perspective of the traditional mediation doctrine. This legislation is in no way connected to the general set of rules on mediation incorporated into the Judicial Code. The question arises whether an internal comparative study between the two separate schemes can shed more light on potential bottlenecks in the current regulation. A comparison reveals significant differences in regard to the importance attributed to certain key elements of mediation, namely the principles of voluntary participation, confidentiality, party self-determination as well as the involvement of an independent and impartial third party who uses mediation methods and techniques. The customary interpretation and understanding of the concept ‘mediation’ apparently doesn’t apply to tax mediation. A brief overview of the Dutch mediation practice in fiscal affairs shows that a more holistic approach, in respect of the aforementioned principles, is nonetheless possible.

In February 2013 a Dutch delegation of four students and two coaches travelled to Paris to participate in the annual International Commercial Mediation Competition.

This contribution examines how the Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters is transposed in various member states of the European Union, or how the discussion about the transposition is conducted or is still ongoing in some countries. The following seven countries are examined: Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, England, France, Germany and Austria.

In the Netherlands victim-offender mediation is scarcely organized. However, the Dutch criminal procedure does offer possibilities for the implementation of mediation. In this article four modalities are discussed. At the stage of police investigation the police can refer parties to a mediation service. At the stage of the prosecution the public prosecutor can offer mediation as a condition for dismissal. When the case has been laid before a Court, the parties can involve in mediation after the proceedings have been stayed. The result of the mediation can then be taken into account by the Judge in the penal decision. When it comes to the more serious offences there should be possibilities for mediation at the stage of the penal execution. However, because of the contrasts between the principles of mediation and the criminal procedure, all of the modalities will have to find a balance between these principles.

This contribution examines the European Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters and deals with the question whether the Belgian law on mediation, namely Articles 1724 to 1737 of the Belgian Judicial Code, as introduced into the Belgian law in 2005, need to be amended in the light of the Directive. It concludes that in some aspects the Belgian law ought to be improved so to implement some provisions of the Directive not yet dealt with in the law of 2005. It recommends to include in the Belgian law a definition on mediation, and also to stipulate which Belgian institution in particular shall provide the requested information on mediation and communicate with the European authorities. The contribution also suggests to consider introducing into the Belgian law a mechanism to promote mediation through incentives and/or sanctions, for which the measures recently adopted in the English legal system might possibly serve as an example.