Here is a list of questions that concern alternative dispute resolution methods.

Alternative dispute resolution methods are extrajudicial processes. They oppose traditional dispute resolution methods which aim to bring the dispute before a state judge.

Mediation is fundamentally different from arbitration. It aims at helping the parties to reach an amicable agreement, thanks to the intervention of a qualified third party whose role is to organize debates. The mediator leaves the parties enough freedom to build a mutually acceptable agreement together. On the other side, arbitration aims at solving a conflict thanks to a rendered award, which binds the parties, in the same way as a legal procedure would have done.

The Conventional mediation process is initiated by the parties themselves. All they have to do is to turn to CMAP. This request can be caused by a mediation clause or emerge from either party's initiative.

Judicial mediation is a measure ordered by the civil or commercial judge with the prior agreement of the parties. CMAP can be appointed by all the country's courts.

Thus, the difference results in terms of implementation of the process, the conduct of judicial mediation and conventional mediation is then identical. Discover mediation more thoroughly.

The procedure that enables an arbitration award to be enforceable on French territory is called “exequatur”. In France, the competent court to decide the enforcement of an award is the Tribunal de Grande Instance where the award was made or the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris when it was made abroad.

All mediator or arbitrator must be independent, neutral and impartial in respect to the parties. He must inform the parties of all circumstances that would be likely to affect his independence and / or his impartiality.

In addition to a code of ethics to which the CMAP 's mediators and arbitrators are submitted, the Center takes care, before the implementation of each file, to ask its mediators and arbitrators to sign a specific declaration on the independence for each case.

Mediation and Conciliation are two methods of conflicts resolutions in which a third-party is involved. His role varies from one method to another. Unlike the conciliator who has an active role in the conciliation process (eg he can propose a solution to end the conflict), the mediator assists the parties throughout the mediation process to help them find a solution to their dispute by themselves.

Mediation and Conciliation refer to the dispute resolution process in which two or more parties attempt to reach an amicable agreement with the help of a third party.

There are few differences between mediation and conventional conciliation.

However, judicial mediation and judicial conciliation are governed by different laws.

Article 21 of the CPC provides that "to reconcile the parties is part of the judge's mission".

Judicial conciliation is implemented by the judge himself or by a conciliator to whom he will have delegated his mission to reconcile.

However, judicial mediation is entrusted to a mediator, an external party to the jurisdiction.As provided in Article 131-1 of the CPC, the judge may appoint the mediator if the parties agree. The conciliation is free for the parties. Mediation is a chargeable service.

No, either party is free to put an end to the process at any time.

You can not appeal, unless both parties agree to.

This is one of the advantages of arbitration: it enables the parties to obtain a final decision in a few months (an average of 8 to 12 months with the CMAP). Whereas several years would be necessary if the case was taken before national judges.

No, an international arbitration award rendered in France can only be challenged for annulment and cannot be appealed.  The action for annulment is introduced within a month (from the notification of the award).