It has recently been announced that a new “Japan International Mediation Centre” (JIMC) is to open in Kyoto in early 2018.
While details on the new centre are still limited, it is known that it is being established in collaboration and with the assistance of the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC), which may provide an indication of how the new centre is likely to operate.
The establishment of the centre is an interesting development in a jurisdiction which is known for its amenability to privately negotiated settlements of disputes but in which (along with many other Asian jurisdictions) the concept of mediation has failed to thrive and become institutionally embedded.
For more on the JIMC, read our Japan Dispute Avoidance Newsletter.
Herbert Smith Freehills also hosts a dedicated ADR Hub as a resource for our clients. This includes a spotlight series on ADR in Asia Pacific, Issue 2 of which specifically delves into ADR in Singapore including the features of the SIMC.
Further to our earlier post highlighting material from our recently updated Guide to Dispute Resolution in Asia Pacific, we now feature in part 2 the responses from Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Laos, Macau, Malaysia and Myanmar to the question whether parties to litigation or arbitration in that jurisdiction are required to consider or submit to ADR procedures before or during proceedings.
Please click here to preview this publication. To request a copy of the guide, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Our updated Guide to Dispute Resolution in Asia Pacific aims to provide answers to some of the basic questions a party unfamiliar with a particular jurisdiction will wish to ask when facing the prospect of having to engage in a dispute resolution process in that jurisdiction (including at the stage of negotiating contracts, when deciding on the choice of law and whether to include jurisdiction or arbitration clauses in favour of a particular jurisdiction).
Amongst the range of topics addressed in the Guide, we asked local counsel whether parties to litigation or arbitration are required to consider or submit to ADR procedures before or during proceedings. We will feature the responses of the various jurisdictions in upcoming posts and cover our first five jurisdictions (Australia, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong and India) below.
Herbert Smith Freehills is pleased to announce the launch of The Global Pound Conference (GPC) Series 2016-17.
The aim of this ambitious worldwide conference series is to build a global conversation about the current landscape of civil and commercial dispute resolution and how dispute resolution tools and institutions should respond to the needs of 21st century business. In particular, it aims to gather standardised and actionable data on what users of dispute resolution mechanisms need and want and whether those needs are being met.
Over 25 countries worldwide have already committed to holding a GPC event, with more being added. The launch will take place at a two-day conference in Singapore on 17-18 March 2016 and the last event is scheduled to be held in London in July 2017. Other cities will include Hong Kong, Paris, Dubai, Madrid, Sydney, New York and Frankfurt/Berlin.
The Series, which is being led by the International Mediation Institute (IMI), is being sponsored by Herbert Smith Freehills as well as other global partners: Shell, AkzoNobel, the Beijing Arbitration Commission (BAC), JAMS, and the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR).
We previously reported the publication of our ADR in Asia Guide. As well as distilling the results of our client survey on the use of mediation in Hong Kong, the Guide contains a summary of the main ADR processes used across Asia and includes our Dispute Resolution Wheel, explaining at a glance the characteristics of the various dispute resolution processes you may encounter in Asia.
That summary and Dispute Resolution Wheel can now be downloaded separately, here. If you would like a copy of our full Guide, please email email@example.com.
It is generally accepted that, while the use of mediation is on the rise globally, this trend is significantly more pronounced in the West than in Asia. While the modern concept of formal mediation has of course been around for longer in the West, and has had more time to take hold, can this alone explain the disparity? Or does the explanation lie at least partly in how mediation is ‘sold’ ?
Sean Izor, an associate in our Beijing and Hong Kong offices, examines this issue in an article recently published in the Asian Journal on Mediation. In particular, he seeks to identify a number of broad cultural differences in the way individuals approach disputes generally and suggests that practitioners and proponents of mediation would do well to bear these in mind when seeking to communicate the benefits of mediation to Asian parties.
Read the article ‘Selling Mediation in the East – Is there an Asian Way?’ (© Singapore Mediation Centre. Originally published in  Asian Journal on Mediation, 1. Reprinted with permission.)
We have today launched Herbert Smith Freehills’ new Asia disputes blog, Asia Disputes Notes, where you will find the latest updates on disputes related topics from across the Asian jurisdictions in which we operate (Hong Kong and Greater China, Southeast Asia, Japan and Korea). The posts will cover developments relating to litigation, ADR, international arbitration, and investigations and compliance. We will of course continue to cover ADR developments in Asian jurisdictions in our ADR Notes.
As with our other blogs, content on the site can be accessed in various ways, including by jurisdiction, by category, by ‘tag’ for specific developments and sub-topics, or by key-word searching. You can subscribe to the blog to receive notifications by e-mail when items are posted or you can visit the site whenever you choose at http://hsf-asiadisputesnotes.com/ or via the link under “Our blogs” in the top menu.
A number of alternative dispute resolution procedures are available and recognised in Japan – including expert determination, mediation, conciliation, and multi-track dispute resolution processes (ie a combination of different dispute resolution mechanisms such as arbitration and expert determination). Peter Godwin, Managing Partner of Herbert Smith Freehills GJBJ, Tokyo, reviews the increase in ADR usage in certain sectors, as well as the rise of dispute escalation provisions and agreements to negotiate in good faith. Continue reading
“The Law Concerning the Promotion of the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures” (the “ADR Promotion Law”) was promulgated on 1 December 2004 and came into effect on 1 April 2007. This law allows the Minister of Justice to give accreditation to private-sector organisations that help resolve civil disputes outside the Japanese public court system. On 24 June 2009, a Law on the Partial Revision of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Law for 2009 (Law No 58) was promulgated, which applies the accreditation system created by the ADR Promotion Law to various financial sub-sectors by revision of laws such as the Insurance Business Law.
Industry associations have until 23 June 2010 to obtain accreditation. The ADR institutions of the Japan Securities Dealers Association, The Life Insurance Association of Japan, The General Insurance Association of Japan, and the Japanese Bankers Association and the Trust Companies Association of Japan have recently announced their intention to obtain accreditation.