Here you will find more information about the mediation process and its advantages and differences compared to other methods of dispute resolution.

1. Accountable solution: The parties themselves, rather than a third party, make the decision: An accountable consensus is the result. If a decision is made by a court or arbitration tribunal, the parties must ultimately comply with the judgment. Even a court settlement is, in qualitative terms, very different from a mediated solution, as it is usually based on a mere convergence of positions and there is often judicial pressure to reach a settlement in order to resolve the dispute quickly. This hardly eliminates the underlying problems. A settlement is often a liability for both sides, whereas a mediation result is often an asset for all parties involved.

2. Interest-based solution: The true interests and needs of the parties, which often underly the positions expressed, can be taken into account in mediation. In court proceedings, on the other hand, positions are merely put forward and the differences are emphasized, rather than minimized, in order to enforce one’s own rights.

3. Short duration: Mediation is characterized by a short duration of proceedings compared to judicial and arbitration proceedings. A solution can often be reached within a single session, or within a few weeks in the case of more difficult issues.

4. Low costs: The parties generally have relatively low costs. Since litigation costs such as court fees, expert witness fees, and lawyers’ fees are usually determined by the amount in dispute and the duration of proceedings, the costs can be extremely high, especially in the case of protracted litigation. For the losing party, the result is also undesirable. Mediation, on the other hand, offers a cost-effective opportunity for an independent solution to the conflict that benefits all parties involved.

5. Voluntary in nature: Mediation is voluntary. Each party can terminate the mediation process if they no longer wish to continue.

6. All doors remain open: If mediation does not bring about a solution or one party does not want to continue, court litigation is still an option. The parties have only invested a few days, incurred manageable costs, and expended a little energy, but have not relinquished any rights. If, on the other hand, a court case is launched immediately, the positions usually become entrenched quickly and a subsequent consensus-based solution becomes much more difficult.

7. No scorched earth: If an agreement is reached through mediation, future cooperation between the parties remains possible, whereas in litigation the basis for future constructive cooperation is usually eroded and ultimately lost.

8. Confidentiality: Mediation is a confidential process, whereas court proceedings are public. Mediation can prevent the conflict from becoming public knowledge, while at the same time averting potential damage to the parties’ image.

9. No time-consuming establishment of facts: Since mediation focuses on the future and not on the past, there is no need to assign guilt. There is therefore no need to establish facts as in court proceedings when evidence is taken. On the one hand, this saves costs, as no expensive expert reports have to be drawn up, and on the other hand it saves a lot of internal resources and hence time and energy.

10. Focus on the future: The solution reached is usually an agreement for the future, whereas in court-based conflict resolution, decisions are made about what has already happened. The agreement reached through mediation is intended to ensure a viable future relationship between the parties