a benefit of mediating is that the parties involved in the dispute maintain control over their outcome. a decision is not imposed, it is only reached if everyone agrees. this can provide not only a safe environment to consider options but the ability to be creative + unique. mediation can offer outcomes that decision makers cannot offer.

a downside to mediating is that it offers no guarantees. because the parties maintain control over their outcome, they may not find agreeable terms of settlement.

med-arb combines the benefits of mediation while avoiding the drawbacks of the process by providing an outcome. med-arb offers closue.

the parties first mediate. if they are unable to settle on their own, the mediator becomes the decision maker and provides an outcome for them.

an additional advantage of med-arb is that parties tend to take preparation for the mediation phase more seriously + have a better sense of what having a decision imposed upon them would look like in the course of mediation. many believe that this increases the chances of settling in mediation.

marc believes that the mediation phase of med-arb can at least help clarify + narrow issues, reducing delay + cost of proceeding with arbitration. if nothing else, having a path to an outcome clear can avoid inefficiency.

 

frequently asked questions