Mediation—international Q&A guides

When dealing with mediation the Getting the Deal Through guides provide information in the form of a series of questions and answers. The questions are set out below, followed by links to Practice Notes covering jurisdictions in Europe and the rest of the World.

International comparator tool

The International comparator tool is designed to allow lawyers to compare legal differences across two or more jurisdictions

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Dispute Resolution News

The Supreme Court holds that the doctrine of merger does not extend to declaratory judgments (Nasir v Zavarco Plc)

The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, holding that the doctrine of merger is confined to ‘coercive judgments’ and does not extend to declaratory judgments. Jack Mitchell of Old Square Chambers comments on the implications of the judgment.

Kuwaiti Co applications to claw back US$1.2bn from Saudi prince

Law360, London: A Kuwaiti telecommunications business urged a London appeals court on 14 February 2025 to find that a Saudi prince should not be able to dodge a US$1.2bn arbitration debt, arguing that the royal can validly be served documents in England.

Representative actions in copyright infringement claims (Getty Images v Stability AI)

IP analysis: This judgment considers CPR Part 19 representative actions in the context of copyright infringement claims, particularly those that involve alleged infringement of a very large number of works owned by different entities. The court decided that one Claimant, Thomas M Barwick Inc (Barwick), could not act as a representative for a class of individuals (who had licensed copyright works on similar terms to Getty, with the other claimants being members of the Getty corporate group) due to an unclear class definition and issues with how the claim would be case managed. The judgment emphasises the necessity of a clear, outcome-independent class definition and a common interest among class members under CPR 19.8. The court also dismissed an informal application under CPR 19.3 to proceed without joinder of all interested parties, stating there was insufficient evidence to address whether there was potential prejudice to the defendants, though it did not shut out a further application under CPR 19.3 supported by appropriate evidence, and such an application was not precluded by the finding under CPR 19.8. Written by Luke Maunder, associate Director at Osborne Clarke LLP.

Law Centre’s reliance on specialist barrister’s advice endorsed in claim where claimant failed to prove negligence against her legal advisers (Christie v Mary Ward Legal Centre)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court dismissed a professional negligence claim against Mary Ward Legal Centre and a barrister, finding no proof of negligence and endorsing the centre's reliance on specialist advice. The court emphasised that advisers acted appropriately given available information, and the claim was time-barred. This judgment reinforces the importance of clients providing and advisers probing for all relevant evidence; and it validates the practice of non-specialists seeking advice from expert counsel. It also underscores the challenges faced by legal aid providers in complex cases and the court's recognition of their crucial role in assisting vulnerable clients. Practical implications written by the Dispute Resolution team at LexisNexis.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

News