Legal review of the mandatory mediation process in South Africa

Authors

  • Alan John Rycroft University of Cape Town

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/mtp.v1i1.27960

Keywords:

mediation, confidentiality, court review, settlement agreements

Abstract

Judicial understandings of mediation in the context of South Africa’s Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration are evaluated from reported decisions where a party sought to set aside a settlement agreement. What is apparent is that courts generally understand that the process of mandatory mediation can be robust and evaluative. The acceptable borderline for advice-giving, scenario-setting, pressure to settle and monitoring the settlement agreement is fact-specific. There is sufficient discrepancy between the cases to show that judicial assessment varies. Generally the courts seem to have no great concern over the breach of mediator confidentiality required in judicial review and none of the commissioners refused to cooperate in the review process.

Author Biography

Alan John Rycroft, University of Cape Town

Alan John Rycroft is deputy dean and professor of commercial law in the Faculty of Law at the University of Cape Town. He is also an accredited mediator (CEDR). He is the author of several labour law textbooks, and co-authored Mediation: Principles, Process and Practice with Laurence Boulle in 1997. He teaches LLM courses in negotiation, mediation and arbitration at UCT.

References

American Arbitration Association (2005) Model Standards of Conduct for Medi­ators. Adopted by the American Arbitration Association, the American Bar Associ­ation, and the Association for Conflict Resolution. New York: American Arbitration Association. Retrieved on 7 August 2015 from www.adr.org/aaa/ShowProperty?nodeId=%2FUCM%2FADRSTG_010409&revision=latestreleased.

Benjamin, P. (2013) Assessing South Africa’s Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). ILO working paper no. 47. Geneva: Governance and Tripartism Department, International Labour Office. Retrieved on 7 August 2015 from www.ilo.org/ifpdial/information-resources/publications/WCMS_210181/lang--en/index.htm.

Bhorat, H., Pauw, K. and Mncube, L. (2009) Understanding the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Dispute Resolution System in South Africa: An Analysis of CCMA Data. Working paper no. 09/137, 1 July. Cape Town: Development Policy Research Unit. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2184182

Brand, J. (2000) CCMA: achievements and challenges – lessons from the first three years. Industrial Law Journal (South African) 21: 77–98.

Coben, J. R. and Thompson, P. N. (2006) Disputing irony: a systematic look at litigation about mediation. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 11: 43–146.

Cockburn, T. L. and Shirley, M. J. (2003) Setting aside agreements reached at court annexed mediation: procedural grounds and the role of unconscionability. University of Western Australia Law Review 31(1): 70–86.

College of Mediators (2014) Code of Practice for Mediators. Manchester: College of Mediators. Retrieved on 7 August 2015 from www.collegeofmediators.co.uk/sites/default/files/CoM%20Code%20of%20Practice.pdf.

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (2014) Annual Report 2013/14. Johannesburg: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration.

Docrat, H. (2010) Taking the con out of conciliation. Retrieved on 27 April 2016 from http://slideplayer.com/slide/4480431.

Du Toit, D., Godfrey, S., Cooper, C., Giles, G., Cohen, T., Conradie, B. and Steenkamp, A. (2015) Labour Relations Law: A Comprehensive Guide (6th edn). Durban: LexisNexis.

Freedman, L. R. and Prigoff, M. L. (1986–7) Confidentiality in mediation: the need for protection. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 2: 37–45.

Genn, G. (2010) Judging Civil Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139192378

Korobkin, R. B. (2005) The Role of Law in Settlement. In M. L. Moffitt and R. C. Bordone (eds) The Handbook of Dispute Resolution 254–76. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mediator Standards Board (2015) National Mediator Accreditation System (NMAS). Mediator Standards Board. Retrieved on 7 August 2015 from www.msb.org.au/sites/default/files/documents/NMAS%201%20July%202015.pdf.

Riskin, L. L. (1996) Understanding mediators’ orientations, strategies, and techniques: a grid for the perplexed. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 1(7): 7–51. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alt.3810120904

Steenkamp, A. and Bosch, C. (2012) Labour dispute resolution under the 1995 LRA: problems, pitfalls and potential. In R. le Roux and A. Rycroft (eds) Reinventing Labour Law 120–47. Cape Town: Juta Law.

Wade, J. (2012) Evaluative and directive mediation: all mediators give advice. Law Faculty Publications article 427. Retrieved on 7 August 2015 from http://epublications.bond.edu.au/law_pubs/427.

Wall, Jr., J. A., Stark, J. B. and Standifer, R. L. (2001) Mediation: a current review and theory development. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45: 370–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002701045003006

Published

2016-06-04

How to Cite

Rycroft, A. J. (2016). Legal review of the mandatory mediation process in South Africa. Mediation Theory and Practice, 1(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1558/mtp.v1i1.27960

Issue

Section

Policy Articles