Advantages of Resolution of Civil Disputes through Judicial Mediation over Litigation

Levan Zhorzholiani


Dispute resolution of civil cases is compelling matter as for society as legal scholars and judiciary. Existing conditions and statistics analysis reveals that commonly the judges of Tbilisi City Court consider more than thousand cases. Every doubt which is connected to quality of the decisions taken by trial jurisdiction in legit. Accordingly, this paper represents the opinion that the reasonable mean to solve the abovementioned problem is to pass the disputes to the judicial mediation, which includes, shares the most of the advantages and disadvantages of mediation, including its own specifications. The Paper characterizes the institutional parts of mediation and it is compared to the provisions of Civil Procedural Code of Georgia, regulating the terms, expenses and other issues. The object of the paper is launching scholarly dispute about how the resolution of civil disputes through judicial mediation is preferential and what are the disadvantages of current judicial system. Also, the target of the article is to represent the judicial mediation as one of the best ways for the parties to resolve a dispute, maintain relations or terminated it a civilized manner with lesser costs, in a comfortable, informal environment, by their own efforts, quickly, excluding publicity, avoiding the creation of judicial precedents, judicial approval of mediated agreement.


Mediation, judicial mediation, court, confidentiality, expenses, time, informality, Code, legal, mediator, agreement.

Full Text:

PDF PDF (Georgian)


The Civil Procedural Code of Georgia, 14/11/1997.

The Local Rules – Central District of California, United States District Court Central District of California Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management; L.R. 16-15. Policy Re Settlement & ADR.

The Organic Law of Georgia, Georgian Labor Code.

The Resolution №316 of the Government of Georgia of 6 July, 2015.

Alfini J.J., Mccabe G., Catherina G., Mediating in the Shadow of the Courts: A survey of Emerging Case Law, Arkansas Law Review and Bar Association Journal, USA, 2001-2002, 171-174, 196.

Association Agenda between the European Union and Georgia, Judiciary, 2014, 5.

Clark B., Lawyers and Mediation, Springer, University of Strathclyde, Law School, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2012, 59,128, 164.

Clarke G., Davies R., Lyla T., ADR- Argument for and Against Use of Mediation Process Particularly in Family and Neighborhood Disputes, QLD. University of Technology Law Journal, 1991, 81, 84, 88, 89, 95 .

De Palo G., D’ Uros L., Trevor M., Branon B., Canessa R., Cawyer B., Florence R., European Parliament, Brussels, “Rebooting” The Mediation Directive: Assessing the Limited Impact of its Implementation and Proposing Measures to Increase the Number of Mediation in the EU, 2014, 12, 17, 26, 32, 41.

De Palo G., Trevor M.B., EU Mediation Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, 2012, 111, 113, 128, 129, 146, 170.

Ervasti K., Conflicts Before the Courts and Court _ Annexed Mediation in Finland, Scandinavian Studies in Law, 2012, 196.

Kovach K.K., Mediation in a Nutshell, Thomson West, University of Texas, 2003, 34-37, 40, 173.

Tsertsvadze G., Mediation, "Meridiani", Tbilisi, 2010,52-59, 163-166, 216, 334-337.

Tsertsvadze G.(ed.), Perspectives of Legal Regulation of Mediation in Georgia, National Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution, Tbilisi., 2013, 52-59, 163-166, 216, 334-337.

Tbilisi City Court Letter №2-04236/69, 15.12.2016,

Tbilisi City Court Letter №1-180, 22.12.2016.






  • There are currently no refbacks.