Photograph : Anthony Devlin/PA
The mediation settlement of Barry George’s defamation claim against a number of national newspapers attracted widespread media coverage. The details of what went on in the mediation are of course not reported which is the point I wish to make. Look at the control the two parties retained over this matter compared to what would have happened had the matter progressed to trial in open court.
Here is Barry George’s statement after the hearing before Mr Justice Eady to confirm the consent order:
“I am pleased that the matter between myself and News Group Newspapers has been amicably settled following a successful mediation without the need for litigation.”
And the News Group Newspapers’ statement:
“We are pleased this matter has been amicably resolved following successful mediation and without the need for litigation.”
The similarity of these comments is not mere coincidence. This will have been one of the finer details of the settlement agreement worked on at the mediation. One of the most important features of a mediation settlement is that you are not limited to the matters which the court could deal with – you can go beyond that to deal with confidentiality, apologies and any other matters of importance to the parties. The parties retain full control of this process because they are the ones making the decisions.
Tell me about a mediation settlement you have been involved in which was more advantageous than any order you could have got at court – post a comment below.
Related posts:
