Our mediators have established themselves as leaders in the rapidly developing world of commercial mediation both in the United Kingdom and internationally. They have conducted some 250 mediations in the last twelve months and have assisted in settling claims worth over five billion pounds.
The dedication of Tony Willis, William Wood QC, Stephen Ruttle QC and John Sturrock QC to mediation is reflected by their rankings in Band 1 of Chambers & Partners, and the presence of all four, together with Geoff Sharp, in the top ten of the International Who’s Who of Commercial Mediation. 50% of the UK ranked mediators in the Who’s Who Legal 2016 are from Brick Court. Tony Willis is the sole holder of the title Who’s Who Legal Global Commercial Mediator of the Year being awarded the title, based on votes by peers and clients as well as feedback and research, in the five consecutive years since its inception.
In addition to conducting mediations in London, our mediators often work elsewhere in the UK and have worked in New York, Hong Kong, Dubai, Singapore, New Zealand, Trinidad, the Bahamas, Romania, Greece, Ireland, Belgium, Jersey and Guernsey.
Contact Kate Trott with any enquiries on 020 7520 9813 or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Stay up to date with the latest mediation news and tips by visiting the Brick Court Chambers Mediation Blog.
Further information about our mediators can be downloaded here,
Our mediators are happy to assist in designing the right dispute resolution procedure for your dispute.
This may involve combining elements of mediation and other more traditional evaluative techniques such as arbitration.
We have recent experience of a major and very complex reinsurance dispute being resolved by means of a mediation in which individual points of difference (notably aggregation issues) were referred out to a separate arbitrator for rapid resolution as and when they arose as sticking points in the negotiation. With the points resolved, the mediation resumed.
“Med/arb” is a term used to describe an even closer combination of the two elements, sometimes with the mediator switching roles halfway through to render an arbitration award in the event that a settlement cannot be reached by agreement. The advantage for the parties is that they know their dispute will be resolved one way or another by the end of the process.
Difficulties can arise in relation to confidential information however. Parties may be more reticent than usual about being frank with the mediator when he/she may be about to rule on the issues. The mediation part of the process can be chilled and become less effective. The parties and the mediator also need to be very clear as to what use the mediator can make of any confidential material received when subsequently arbitrating.
One solution can be to have both a mediator and an arbitrator present for an opening hearing in which both listen to the parties setting out their case. The arbitrator does not then attend any private discussions between the mediator and the parties. The arbitrator only becomes involved again when called upon to render an award in the event that the mediator fails to broker a settlement.
Our mediators and arbitrators are happy to look at all and any of these options in appropriate cases.