A passing remark by the judge in this case points to reality and why the mediation went to pot. He mentioned that the parties reached a so-called agreement “after a mediation lasting about nine hours”. That point might explain why, a few days after signing the agreement, one party got the collywobbles and wanted to back out. Let me say, for the umpteenth time: mediation doesn’t work properly when it drags on interminably – and nine hours is just that.

Go further: the idea of dragging out the mediation hour after hour is, to some folk (especially old hands), a mean but effective sword in the armoury. Wear the other side out! Don’t take a break. Don’t stop for food, nor to sit on the loo. Tiredness drives folk to cave in. I do so wish that the party who wanted to back out had told the judge that he was simply worn down by fatigue. By then he hadn’t got his head on.

The dispute – Mr Rajinder Aujla vs Mr Narvinder Aujla – was about property ownership. The two brothers argued over who owned what. Mediating is much like coaxing someone to believe buying an electric car is sensible. (Or indeed like then prime minister Gordon Brown trying to coax us to believe buying a diesel car was sensible.

Read more …