Reflections on LIDW

What a week it was! London International Disputes Week took place over 5 days last week and I’m only just recovering. So much to take in and so many people to talk to – I felt somewhat like I had emerged from a rather 2D monchrome world into one full of colour, energy and 3D people. To some degree, this was the case. Despite talking to my fellow organisers every Friday (and often more) for the past 33 weeks I hadn’t met any of them in person until last Tuesday.

There was so much interesting discussion last week that I can’t possibly do it justice here so I will focus on what, as a mediator, I took away from the week and the events I attended.

Firstly, it was a delight to have a place on the organising committee. By its nature, mediation is a solitary occupation and so it was great to be collaborating with others across the dispute resolution spectrum on bringing together a week of discussion. Mediation is, for various reasons, the lesser promoted cousin of litigation and arbitration and it was hugely fortunate that the founders of LIDW chose to refer to disputes week rather than arbitration week or litigation week thereby allowing us to stand alongside them as a recognised dispute resolution choice. And, this year, it was clear that mediation was no longer represented by one stand alone session but that it was woven into many of the sessions that took place through the week.

The in-person conference opened with a discussion of the environmental impact of dispute resolution and we heard from Lucy Greenwood founder of the Campaign for Greener Arbitration, Jenny Hindley for Greener Litigation and John Sturrock QC on the World Mediators Alliance on Climate Change. This opening keynote set the tone for a week with the theme, Dispute Resolution – Global, Sustainable, Ethical?

Mediation featured in the session on settlement and risk management for businesses, co-moderated by IPOS mediator, Rebecca Clark. Abhijit Mukhopadhyay, General Counsel for the Hinduja Group’s words “That I’m not employed to litigate I’m employed to make money” were a challenge to external counsel to remember the commercial implications of disputes and that the legal arguments might come second in priority. The in-house counsel panellists were keen to talk internally about settlement rather than mediation because the mention of mediation can make those involved think about it as a legal process handled by the legal team rather than a process that needs the input and involvement of the business. Indeed, having the relevant business people at the mediation table was viewed as often vital to unlocking the dispute. Kai-Uwe Karl from GE Renewable Energy spoke of how ownership of the dispute was very important and that the legal, business and finance teams needed to be joined up in their approach.

Natalie Reynolds and Jonathan Powell’s conversation about negotiation - both with terrorists and in business – offered some very useful insights into the psychology of negotiation and what works. As mediators, we sometimes see parties come to the table wholly unprepared and unskilled for the negotiation before them. I’d recommend Natalie’s book “We have a deal” for a refresher on the approach required.

And we need to look to the future – Sir Geoffrey Vos’s vision for digital justice offers both opportunities and challenges to the mediation market – we need, as is inherent in the mediation process, to remain adaptable and creative in how we respond.

The discreet, confidential and creative nature of mediation was highlighted in the discussions on art disputes at the IDRC on Thursday morning and again at Baker McKenzie in a discussion about trust disputes, the latter chaired by Arabella Murphy. In the context of art disputes where the object in dispute can’t simply be sold and the proceeds split – because it might be the only one of its kind in the world – mediation can often provide a more sophisticated outcome. Will George from Addleshaw Goddard, shared this view in relation to trust disputes. It was his view that, despite what the parties often think, mediation can provide a similar solution to what might be achieved via a judge but, because it can be framed to achieve buy in from all parties, can offer a finality and acceptance that a judgment imposed by a court or tribunal might not.

We finished the week co-hosting an event at RPC on insurance disputes in a post-Covid ESG era. Mediation did feature in the discussion although I think, perhaps, the main learning point for those of us who hold directorships is that we need to check our D & O coverage!

I will finish with a thank you to those who co-hosted events with us, appeared as a panellists and to those who attended the week – without whom it would not have been nearly so interesting or fun! If you did attend the week and have any feedback on the organisation or content please do get in touch.