Question 1

Does conflicool compete with Justice?

Accepted Answer

conflicool strongly supports the right of every person to "a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law" (Art 6 European Convention on Human Rights).

But even more than supporting this right to qualitative and impartial Justice offered by the Belgian courts, conflicool facilitates its real exercise: by actively proposing mediation as a means of dispute settlement, conflicool demonstrates that access to justice for all should not be confused with the right to bring any dispute immediately to court

Many of the magistrates consulted for the launch of conflicool agree that mediation is not only an alternative but increasingly THE appropriate method for settling certain family, social or civil and commercial disputes. In a way, they express the wish that recourse to the courts should be made in cases where it is really desirable, while recalling the right of every litigant to so wish

Question 2

Can the judge order the parties to go to conflicool?

Accepted Answer

conflicool is a platform for appointing - subject to their agreement - a mediator accredited to the parties in conflict to assist them in a reasoned negotiation aimed at finding an amicable solution to their dispute. While it is probably not legally conceivable to order the parties to use conflicool in the context of proceedings, there is nothing to prevent the magistrate from encouraging the parties to rely on conflicool through mediation ordered by the judge under the conditions proposed by the Judicial Code as amended by the law of 18 June 2018.

Question 3

does conflicool disrupt the work of Justice?

Accepted Answer

Mediation helps to relieve congestion in the Belgian courts. This is at least one of the avowed objectives of the Law of 18 June 2018 on various amendments to the Judicial Code with a view to promoting alternative forms of dispute resolution. This new law has yet to make its youthful ills and it is too early to say whether the objective of conferring, in certain circumstances, a residual role on the Judge will have been achieved or was desirable. The fact remains that if a constructive cooperation is established between actors of Justice (magistrates, mediators, bailiffs, experts and lawyers) around the basic needs of the litigants, a harmonious distribution of conflict resolution between the judicial system and the amicable way will naturally be organised

Question 4

does conficool cost more than justice? Does the cost of a trial increase because of conflicool?

Accepted Answer

Conflictool is free, but mediation is not. According to the barometer of the bMediation institute, mediation takes on average 4 to 5 sessions spread over 45 days (in civil matters) to 60 days (in family matters). It costs on average +/- € 1,000 (in family matters) to +/- € 3,000 (in civil matters)

State justice is not free but, contrary to popular belief, it is not expensive since, on average, the citizens directly contribute only about 5% of the cost of justice. On the other hand, the costs inherent to any trial (lawyers' and possible experts' fees, bailiffs' fees and possible procedural allowances) mean that, because of the significantly longer duration of a legal proceeding - certainly if a party appeals or appeals to the Supreme Court - the cost of the latter will in many cases be (much) higher than that of mediation. Moreover, mediation often takes place in the course of the proceedings and has the effect of reducing the total cost of the dispute.

However, if pre-trial mediation is unsuccessful, the costs of such mediation would be added to the costs of the subsequent trial. However, it should be remembered that 80% of mediations result in an agreement and that when this is not the case, the parties have nevertheless gained in mutual understanding, which can have a positive clarifying effect on the judicial procedure

Dear Judges

Une question sur votre situation spécifique ?