Detailansicht
Institutional, statutory and general mediation rules for international dispute settlement
Evelyn Zach
Art der Arbeit
Dissertation
Universität
Universität Wien
Fakultät
Rechtswissenschaftliche Fakultät
Betreuer*in
Thomas Klicka
DOI
10.25365/thesis.5993
URN
urn:nbn:at:at-ubw:1-29484.16074.146270-5
Link zu u:search
(Print-Exemplar eventuell in Bibliothek verfügbar)
Abstracts
Abstract
(Deutsch)
Nicht nur international agierende Unternehmen, auch Staaten und Internationale Organisationen greifen immer häufiger auf eine dritte, neutrale Instanz zur gütlichen Beilegung von wirtschaftlichen Streitigkeiten zurück. Mediation erlaubt es den Parteien deren Streitigkeiten eigenverantwortlich, schnell, kostengünstig und flexibel zu lösen. Was ist nun aber zu beachten, wenn man ein Mediationsverfahren einleiten möchte oder eine Mediationsklausel in ein Vertragsdokument inkludiert wird? Gibt es gesetzliche Regeln die beachtet werden müssen? Kann man auf Verfahrensregeln zurückgreifen? Wo findet man einen qualifizierten Mediator? Kann man eine Mediationsvereinbarung oder das Ergebnis einer Mediation vollstrecken? Diese und viele andere Fragen werden sich Parteien einer Mediation stellen. Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich unter Kapitel 2 mit allgemeinen Fragen, die sich Parteien, Parteienvertreter und Mediatoren vor, während und nach der Mediation stellen sollten. In Kapitel 3 wirft die Autorin einen Blick auf die in Österreich gültigen gesetzlichen Regelungen sowie die Richtlinie der Europäischen Union, welche im Mai 2011 in Kraft tritt. Darüber hinaus wirft die Autorin unter Kapitel 5 einen kritischen Blick auf die Verfahrensregeln über Mediation von Organisationen wie UNCITRAL, ICC, LCIA, SCCAM, VIAC, CEDR oder MEDAL. Anhand von 14 wesentlichen Fragestellungen vergleicht und untersucht die Autorin die unterschiedlichen Verfahrensregeln.
Abstract
(Englisch)
Not only multinational companies but also states and international organisations have recognized the value of methods for settling commercial disputes through involvement of a third neutral person assisting them in their attempt to settle their dispute amicably. Mediation proceedings permit the parties to seek a high quality amicable solution to their disputes using a minimum of time and resources. They are intended to be party-controlled, rapid, inexpensive and flexible. Although the process should be as flexible as possible, parties often find it helpful to refer to a procedural framework provided by a set of established rules, like the UNCITRAL, ICC, LCIA, SCCAM, VIAC, CEDR or MEDAL mediation procedure, to bring shape and discipline to the process. Institutional mediation rules refer to the entire mediation process from the initiation until the termination. Apart from institutional rules, which are not part of a national legislation, mediation is often not subject to any domestic procedural law. Especially in Europe, yet, few national laws on mediation exist. This situation will change within the next years. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union have enacted 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. According to the Mediation Directive, all Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations, and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Mediation Directive before 21 May 2011. Therefore, Member States are now required to deal with the question of whether its legal system reflects the content of the Mediation Directive. Members of the European Union must in particular adopt procedures to enforce mediation settlement agreements, protect the confidentiality of mediation communications, provide for regulations on suspension of limitation periods and promote training of mediators under the Mediation Directive. The Mediation Directive is intended to increase access to justice by providing an additional mechanism for resolving disputes. Even though there are considerable efforts underway to make mediation more popular within the environment of international dispute settlement, there is still a long way to go to.
This thesis first deals with the question which basic considerations, should be borne in mind when deciding about the method of resolving disputes. Such basic considerations include amongst others the choice between different dispute settlement methods, timing, professional assistance, persons involved in the dispute settlement process, rules of procedure and enforcement of a settlement agreement (section 2). Secondly, this paper follows the development of statutory and institutional mediation rules for international dispute settlement. It offers insights into the provisions of the Austrian Act on Mediation in Civil Matters, the Mediation Directive and discusses the provisions of the Mediation Act in light of the requirements of the Mediation Directive (section 3). Thirdly, it describes several institutional rules including those of UNCITRAL, ICC, LCIA, SCCAM, VIAC, CEDR and MEDAL presenting in an analytical and clear manner the relations and differences behind these mediation provisions (section 4).
Schlagwörter
Schlagwörter
(Englisch)
International mediation mediation ICC VIAC SCCAM CEDR MEDAL UNCITRAL LCIA Austrian Mediation Act European Mediation Directive institutional mediation rules
Schlagwörter
(Deutsch)
Internationale Mediation Mediation ICC VIAC SCCAM CEDR MEDAL UNCITRAL LCIA Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz Europäische Mediationsrichtlinie Mediationsverfahren
Autor*innen
Evelyn Zach
Haupttitel (Englisch)
Institutional, statutory and general mediation rules for international dispute settlement
Paralleltitel (Deutsch)
Institutionelle, gesetzliche und allgemeine Mediationsregeln zur Beilegung Internationaler Streitigkeiten
Publikationsjahr
2009
Umfangsangabe
219 S.
Sprache
Englisch
Beurteiler*innen
Thomas Klicka ,
Walter Rechberger
Klassifikation
86 Recht > 86.15 Allgemeines Prozessrecht, Zivilprozess
AC Nummer
AC07858670
Utheses ID
5384
Studienkennzahl
UA | 083 | 101 | |