Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Mediation has been a part of New Zealand’s employment statutory framework in one form or another for over a century, and has been the first port of call for employment disputes under the current Employment Relations Act for nearly 15 years.¹ I have been working as a mediator in this context for almost seven years in more than 1,000 mediations. Lawyers are playing a significant part in the field of mediation, with a large number representing clients in this forum on a regular basis. In an evaluation of 100 of my mediations over a ten-month period, 85% of parties were legally represented. This rate is consistent with anecdotal reporting across the employment mediation service. Lawyer representation in mediation is not unique to the employment context. There are various mediation schemes provided for under many New Zealand statutes as well as a wide raft of non-statutory mediation occurring in numerous settings. In my experience as a mediator with human rights and leaky building mediations, as well as working as a lawyer in a large commercial law firm, I am aware lawyers are representing clients in many other areas of mediation as well. Although there is a significant amount of mediation occurring and a large number of lawyers regularly appearing in mediation, my experience is that the majority of lawyers act in mediation as if they were in litigation and take an adversarial approach. My thesis is that lawyers have not adapted effectively to mediation and taken on the role of mediation advocacy. This paper explores the topic by first describing, in Part II, what I observe as lawyers’ adversarial approach in mediation. It then looks at other research to assess whether this experience is reflective of a wider issue. It finds there is evidence to support my observations. Part III analyses why lawyers are operating in an adversarial way in mediation and proposes several reasons this may be the case. Part IV puts forward what I propose is appropriate mediation advocacy. It sets out the knowledge, roles and skills required from lawyers when representing clients in mediation. Part V suggests what might be done to assist a shift away from the common, adversarial approach to effective mediation advocacy. This paper is written within the context of employment mediation in New Zealand. However, it draws on research from different jurisdictions and areas of practice so the conclusions it comes to may have more general application. The topic is not whether lawyers should be in mediation. I am not arguing that lawyers do not have a part to play in mediation. A lawyer well versed in mediation advocacy can play a highly effective part in the process. Leonard Riskin, one of the key authors on the topic of lawyers in mediation, expresses this even more strongly, saying he believes lawyers’ involvement is fundamental to mediation’s success.² Further, this paper is focused on lawyers representing parties in mediation and does not consider lawyers as mediators.

Trabajo de Curso de Experto Universitario en Derecho Concursal (2013). Tutor: Elena Narváez Valdivia. El principio de universalidad ha supuesto la atribución de competencia y jurisdicción al Juez del Concurso de todo aquello que tenga incidencia en el patrimonio del deudor, ello implica que materias que en un principio son competencia de otros órganos administrativos o jurisdiccionales, pasen a formar parte del ámbito de competencia del Juez del Concurso. El presente trabajo tiene como principal finalidad dar a conocer algunos ejemplos de Conflictos de Jurisdicción, señalando que preceptos tanto de la Ley Concursal como de la normativa administrativa, en la mayoria de los casos la Ley General Tributaria, entran en conflicto y cúal es el criterio seguido por el Tribunal de Conflctos de Jurisdiccion. Cabe señalar que algunos de estos casos ya han sido resueltos desde el año 2006, pero que todavía se siguen planteando en la práctica diaria. La investigación de dicha temática parte del concepto general de jurisdicción, del ámbito de jurisdicción y competencia de los Jueces de lo Mercantil; pasando por los mecanismos de resolución de conflictos existentes en nuestro ordenamiento, su tipología, ya sean conflictos de jurisdicción positivos o negativos, procedimiento y órgano competente para su resolución. Finaliza con varios ejemplos de cuestiones prácticas que hacen surgir a día de hoy este tipo de conflictos en los que veremos como en algunos supuestos la normativa administrativa tiene que ceder a los principios rectores del procedimiento concursal, lo que ha supuesto que se haya producido una disminución de ciertos privilegios tradicionales que ostentaba la Administración Pública.