Experience
How and when does a mediation take place, and what is the value-added to mediation as opposed to adjudication?
The following actual cases are examples of how the mediation procedure allows one to obtain a settlement agreement that cuts the costs of adjudication and may revitalize damaged business relationships, adding new verve and intensity to render the relationship stronger than before the dispute. ADR Center’s staff and neutrals adhere to the strictest duty of confidentiality, instituted by the MEDAL International Mediation Rules. The Rules do not permit disclosure of any element that may identify the parties to a mediation, nor any specific information about the dispute itself, without the parties’ consent.
Commercial Disputes
A lawsuit between a well known fashion manufacturer and his retailer drags on for six years. Both parties, after spending € 50.000,00 each in legal fees, realize that they have been severely economically disadvantaged by the breakdown of the relationship. Consequently, they decide to attempt to settle the dispute amicably using ADR Center’s Mediation procedure. After ten hours of mediation conducted by an ADR Center third-party neutral, the parties agree to resume their business relationship and decide to sign a new retail contract. This settlement agreement preserved a valuable business relationship in one mediation session, making the six years the parties spent with their business activity on the hook appear especially fruitless. These parties resolved their dispute in the best way from an economic and relational point of view, and they were able to do so at a predetermined, fixed cost.
Employment Disputes
A manager contests his termination and sues his former company for € 500.000,00. The lawsuit spans four years without an end in sight, leaving the manager drained and frazzled. Finally, the parties ask ADR Center to intervene in order to structure a settlement process. Within one week, in two meetings of three hours each, an ADR Center mediator enables the parties to reach the following agreement: one of the company’s multinational groups signs a consulting services contract with the manager in the amount of € 40.000,00; the contract leaves the door open to future projects. Additionally, the group agrees to pay € 50.000,00 in damages. Both parties are satisfied with the result.
Contractual Disputes
A filmmaker and a movie director have a disagreement on the interpretation of their contract with regard to the quantity of work it requires the movie director to perform. The movie director avers that according to the contract, he has completed his work, and demands payment for additional work requested by the filmmaker and allegedly not covered by the contract. The filmmaker claims that the work in question was provided for in the contract and that the accounts have already been settled pursuant to the terms of the agreement. Both parties stubbornly persist in their positions, and neither wants to set a precedent in court that may jeopardize future projects. The movie director calls upon ADR Center. Through the work of an ADR Center third-party neutral, the parties settle the dispute with the following creative solution: the filmmaker undertakes image promotion on behalf of the movie director during several noteworthy events, and the parties agree to collaborate on two future projects, under advantageous conditions for both.
What is conflict management? ADR Center will show you with a real case
The following companies authorized the publication of their names in order to share their success story, and also because they were not involved in a dispute. Rather, they needed to clarify a contractual management procedure in order to optimize their business relationship.
The United States Navy contracted with Pizzarotti S.p.A. for the construction of a self-contained community comprising hundreds of apartments, located near the US military installation Sigonella in Sicily. To minimize the risk of a dispute during execution of the project, the parties appointed ADR Center to organize a two-day meeting, entitled Partnering Dialogue and overseen by an ADR Center third-party neutral. All stakeholders in the project were invited, so as to jointly and thoroughly identify critical aspects of the execution of the project, preemptively managing and preventing potential sources of conflict. After only two days of Partnering Dialogue, the parties greatly reduced the risk of delivery delays, increased costs, and expensive disputes during the execution of this multi-million dollar project. Ultimately, the construction was delivered on schedule and according to budget, due in part to the success of Partnering Dialogue.
