The Family Justice Centers are an international model where victims of domestic violence and child abuse can find all help needed under one roof. The FJCs are a collaboration of police, justice, welfare, help centers and authorities. The main target is empowering survivors of violence.
The development of the FJC-model is situated in an evolution of the approach of these forms of violence, starting with the recognition of violence against women and child abuse towards a multidisciplinary and collaborative model starting from the needs of survivors of violence. The FJC-model is explained from a field worker point of view and further developments and expected evolutions are mentioned.

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.

Care providers establish often long term relationships with their clients. It is of paramount importance that the threshold for a complaint or dispute resolution is preferably low. Ideally this is not a ‘mini-trial’ in which care provider and client are opposed against each other, but a constructive dialogue at a round table guided by a skillful complaints officer. This is what has been introduced by the Healthcare Quality, Complaints and Disputes Act (the Wkkgz).
The new complaint system introduced with the Wkkgz applies to care covered by the Chronic Care Act (WLZ), the Healthcare Insurance Act (ZVW) and optionally can also apply to care based on the Social Support Act (WMO 2015).
In my opinion it is a missed opportunity that the legislator has not introduced a similar complaint procedure in the Youth Act, but instead has chosen the ‘mini-trial’ option here. Moreover, it is also confusing for care providers and clients to follow different complaints systems next to each other.
Finally, in psychiatric care where decisions of care providers can interfere with the right to self-determination there is a separate complaint procedure with a role for the Family Court. For all other run-of-the mill issues also in the psychiatric care the Wkkgz complaint procedure applies.

This article is about the legal position (labor law) of employees in Dutch schools on a religious basis. Although the normal labor law is applicable in this situation, there are also some divergent regulations. Besides some history and background information, this article discusses some important recent developments in the involved commissions and the topics they can decide about. At last this article is about the legal status of the decisions of the commissions. Are they binding or not?

Taking the recent European Commission’s Report on the application of Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC as a starting point, the authors set out to reconstruct the pattern of ADR/mediation activities undertaken by the EU and the Council of Europe over the past 40 years. The authors conclude that the European initiatives have been conducive to a broadening and deepening of the ADR debate. Remarkable shifts can be observed in the emphasis placed by the European agencies during this period, notably a shift from emancipatory to efficiency-based arguments. The inherent coupling of private mediation and public adjudication entails risks however for each of these distinct conflict resolution strategies. The authors call for advanced research designs to generate the data needed for a genuine evidence-based policy in this domain.

In this article Bie Vanseveren and Inge Vanfraechem outline and discuss the practice of a Hergo with juveniles in Belgium.

The author discusses the details of the new Belgian statute on class actions. An intriguing part of the new legislation is that friendly negotiations between the disputing parties are strongly encouraged, yet the intervention of a professional mediator is wholly absent from the law. This is surprising, as the author emphasizes, in view of the procedural safeguards that mediation entails, safeguards that could also be of use in mass litigation.

In this article the authors compare Belgian and Dutch (draft) regulation of mass damage claims, and notably the prominent place reserved for the collective amicable settlement of such claims. Though collective action for the recovery of damage is still not possible in the Netherlands, Dutch law does provide for the possibility of the court endorsing collectively agreed settlements, since 2005. One of most notorious settlements, i.e. the Dexia case, is discussed, illustrating how individual victims may retain their standing to sue in court, although in such cases the courts show a tendency to cling to the terms of the collective settlement just the same (‘reflex effect or shadow of the settlement’). Mediation in brokering such high profile settlements does not necessarily follow the vested principles of mediation in ‘regular’ one to one disputes.

On 1 January 2015 a new arbitration act entered into force in the Netherlands. This article discusses the main amendments to the old legislation. The purpose of this new act is to improve the efficiency and flexibility of the arbitration process. Partially, the changes consist of codification of existing case law. However, also new elements are introduced such as for example the possibility of remission. Another reason for this revision of the arbitration legislation is to make the Netherlands internationally more attractive as an arbitration venue.
The main changes are related to, for example, the enforcement proceedings, which are significantly shortened for foreign awards, and making the annulment procedure more efficient. Furthermore, consumers are given more protection from arbitration clauses in general conditions, the rules regarding the challenging of arbitrators are amended and allow for the appointment of a third party to decide on the challenge. Summary proceedings are introduced as a possibility. The registration of the arbitral award with the district court is no longer required.

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.

A new law that reforms the Belgian Council of State accomplishes better coordination between the treatment of complaints by ombudsmen and the proceedings before the Council of State. The term to initiate a proceeding is suspended by a complaint to an ombudsman.

In this article Huub Sprangers describes the development of the Dutch Mediatorsfederation, which started its activities at the end of 2013. Several pre-existing Dutch mediation organisations cooperate in this new federation.

In this interview with prominent representatives of the British Acas and the Belgian Social Mediators Service important developments in the ADR labour practice are discussed. In particular, the impact of the financial crisis and the ever advancing globalization process on the labour negotiating climate is the centre of attention.

In 2005 the Mediation Act came into force in Belgium. This act makes it possible starting a procedural and legal mediation procedure, besides the usual legal measures. This article starts with a short introduction to the legal measures and continues with some notable results of an inquiry to the social mediation field by B-Mediation in cooperation with the Federal Mediation Commission. The results of the inquiry are collected in the report Barometer van de bemiddeling 2012. The authors end with confronting the results with their own experiences and an explanation of their own model for practice, and the description of a recent case.