Oryginalny artykuł naukowy
Studia Iuridica

Complaint Against a Mediator as a Mechanism For Controlling The Quality of Mediation Services From A Comparative Legal Perspective

2025, 108, Numer 1

Marek Dąbrowski

orcid.org/0000-0002-7907-0989

DOI

10.31338/2544-3135.si.2025-108.2

Data publikacji

19.12.2025

Model publikowania

-

Rodzaj licencji

-

Dziedzina

Dziedzina nauk społecznych

Dyscyplina

nauki prawne

Klasyfikacja

-

Język publikacji

Angielski

Pliki do pobrania

PDF 512 KB

Artykuł

Liczba wyświetleń:49

Liczba pobrań:24

Cytowania Crossref:0

Wynik Altmetric:0

Zobacz mapę pobrań

Abstrakt

The article analyses the institution of a complaint against a mediator in the Polish legal system, recognising it as a key mechanism for ensuring the quality of mediation services in the light of Article 4 of Directive 2008/52/EC. The analysis was supplemented by three distinguished models of disciplinary liability, integrating various solutions in force in the EU Member States. The results indicate that effective mechanisms for quality control of mediators’ work require the implementation of a system of disciplinary responsibility for mediators in order to ensure high ethical and professional standards. In Poland, this system is poorly developed and the regulations in force are incomplete and take the form of quasi-disciplinary responsibility of mediators. The lack of effective disciplinary procedures, limited competences of supervisory bodies and the lack of obligation to comply with codes of ethics undermine the credibility of mediators and trust in mediation. The comparative legal analysis distinguished three models of disciplinary liability of mediators in the EU: centralised, decentralised and hybrid. They differ in their supervisory structure, scope of competences and complaint-handling mechanisms. The conclusions from the conducted analysis emphasise the need to harmonise the regulations in force in Poland, including the introduction of transparent and dedicated complaint procedures and the expansion of the catalogue of sanctions and their effects. Such actions will enable the achievement of the objectives of Article 4 of Directive 2008/52/EC by ensuring the effectiveness of mechanisms for controlling the quality of mediators’ work and strengthening public confidence in mediation.

Słowa kluczowe:

Bibliografia

Broński W and others, ‘Readiness to Use Mediation – Judges and Entrepreneurs Perspective’ (2024) 20 Utrecht Law Review 21 <https://utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.36633/ulr.1020> accessed 8 May 2025 DOI: 10.36633/ulr.1020

Broński W and others, ‘Research report on public needs and expectations regarding the National Register of Mediators and competency gaps in mediator training’ (John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin 2021) <https://krm.gov.pl/materialy-do-pobrania> accessed 3 May 2025

Buzatu NE, ‘The responsibility of the mediator’ (2013) 4 AGORA International Journal of Juridical Sciences 10 <https://univagora.ro/jour/index.php/aijjs/article/view/849/197> accessed 7 May 2025 DOI: 10.15837/aijjs.v7i4.849

Crowe J, ‘Mediation Ethics and the Challenge of Professionalisation’ (2017) 29 Bond LR 5 <www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/BondLawRw/2017/2.pdf> accessed 7 May 2025 DOI: 10.53300/001c.5643

Dąbrowski M, ‘Assessment of the Correct Implementation of Article 4 of Directive 2008/52/EC of 21 May 2008 on Some Aspects of Mediation in Civil and Commercial Matters in the Polish Legal System’ (2022) 14 Krytyka Prawa 5 <https://repozytorium.kozminski.edu.pl/pub/7077> accessed 4 May 2025 DOI: 10.7206/kp.2080-1084.537

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) ‘Better Implementation of Mediation in the Member States of the Council of Europe. Concrete Rules And Provisions’ (CEPEJ 7 December 2007 ) <https://rm.coe.int/16807475b6> accessed 5 May 2025

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), ‘European Handbook for Mediation Lawmaking’ (CEPEJ 14 June 2019) <www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/mediation-tools> accessed 3 May 2025

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), ‘Mediation Development Toolkit on Ensuring Implementation of the CEPEJ Guidelines on Mediation. European Code of Conduct for Mediation Providers’ (CEPEJ 4 December 2018) <www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/mediation-tools> accessed 3 May 2025

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), ‘Mediation Development Toolkit on Ensuring Implementation of the CEPEJ Guidelines on mediation. Mediation Pilot Monitoring Checklist’ (CEPEJ 27 June 2018) <www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/mediation-tools> accessed 3 May 2025

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), ‘Mediation Development Toolkit on Ensuring implementation of the CEPEJ Guidelines on mediation. Standard mediation forms’ (CEPEJ 4 December 2018) <www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-work/mediation> accessed 6 May 2025

Giętkowski R, Odpowiedzialność dyscyplinarna w prawie polskim (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego 2013)

Koo A, ‘Exploring Mediator Liability in Negligence’ (2016) 45 C.L.W.R. 165 DOI: 10.1177/1473779516668718

Lhuillier J, ‘The Quality of Penal Mediation in Europe’ (CEPEJ 22 August 2007) https://rm.coe.int/1680747b73> accessed 4 May 2025

Maśnicki J, ‘Metody transpozycji dyrektywy’ (2017) 8 Europejski Przegląd Sądowy 4

Press S, ‘Mediator Ethical Breaches: Implications for Public Policy’ (2014) 6 Arbitration Law Review 107 <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2464108> accessed 8 May 2025

Podobne publikacje