This article discusses the Belgian perspective on the Dutch ‘ZAM/ACB research on possibilities and impediments for commercial mediation’ which was undertaken by the Montaigne Centre of the University of Utrecht. In Belgium bMediation, the Federal Mediation Committee and the Ghent University periodically monitor the practice of mediation in Belgium with the instrument of the 'Bemiddelingsbarometer'. It turns out that parties and their advisers in both Belgium and the Netherlands still prefer a traditional judicial approach instead of mediation, mostly because of a lack of information.

The report ‘ZAM/ACB research on possibilities and impediments for commercial mediation’ of the Utrecht Montaigne Centre represents the most important results for the three target groups (lawyers, firms, and judges), with an accent on how users of commercial mediation in the Netherlands think about the potential of mediation.

The hospital sector is not only confronted with the challenges of technical and digital medicine (AI), but also with the expectations of increasingly more talkative patients and their relatives. Luc Van Bauwel introduces you to and testifies about the way in which the ombudsman service of an important hospital group in Antwerp evolved from mere complaint handling as an ombudsservice on the basis of principles of mediation to anchoring the ideas in the liars of management, doctors and other employees; he gives an overview of how the professional ombudsman organized his self and how the surrounding other stakeholders perceived this relatively new ‘ombudsman’ service, which was established by law; how patients have experienced this form of conflict management in the past 15 years, which has been monitored inside the care institution twice in the last 15 years; in the end, he testifies how the acquired/gained trust has grown, as a result of which he now participates on board level in an active role from the very beginning of developing and implementing changes, in the ever-present processes of change, in particular aimed at the doctors associated with the organization.

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.

The ADR Act of 18 June 2018 provides for an insertion into the ‘Gerechtelijk Wetboek’ (Judicial Code), entitled ‘Collaboratieve onderhandelingen’ (Collaborative Negotiations), which came into force on 1 January 2019.

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.

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.

In 2017, empirical research has been conducted at Ghent University regarding the attitude of Belgian lawyers on mediation in the current and future legal and social context. This article explains the background, goals and methodology of the research and unveils some of the results by sharing the first remarkable findings.

Dispute Boards are an alternative ‘real time’ method to avoid disputes. If no settlement can be reached the board will issue a decision which is contractually binding for all parties involved. This way costly arbitrations or court procedures, which generally only start at the end of projects with negative effects for both employer and contractor, are avoided. DBs are especially suited for construction sites and longterm contracts. They have a positive effect on the total cost of the project and avoid delays in the handing over at the end of the project. FIDIC, ICC are already using a special DB-article in their general contract conditions. The Worldbank, JICA, the EIB and MDBs are also using this method when financing international investment projects. Setting up a DB with three members right from the start of a project seldom costs more than 1% of the contract price of the project.

On 16 October 2017 the Ghent Court of Appeal, the Court of First Instance East Flanders, House of Justice Ghent, Centre for Welfare Work East Flanders, House of Mediation, Mediationlink, Mediation-at-Work.be organised a paneldiscussion titled ‘Mediation: only for the happy few?’ as part of the Belgian FBC Mediation Week 2017. Central in the discussion was how and to what extent the access to mediation inside and outside the courts in Belgium can be improved. This question was addressed by the seven members of the panel, representing the various stakeholders involved in mediation. A view that was shared by all was that from a very early age human beings should be educated in how to deal with disputes.

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.

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?