C. A mediation agreement is a contract entered into by the parties of a dispute (conflict) with a mediator concluded voluntary with an intention to find acceptable solution of the dispute. Until the mediation agreement is in force it binds the parties to it. However, there are no so much responsibilities of the parties to a mediation agreement to be enforced against any of them. No one can be forced/enforced to choose mediation for dispute resolution, to elect specific person as a mediator, to continue participating in mediation or to enter into a settlement agreement. And mediators can act only with the consent of the parties of a dispute (conflict). At the same time mediators can be subject to claims for breach of his/her duties, including any related damage claims. D. Mediation represents an attempt to resolve a dispute without submitting a suit to the court. If mediation fails, nothing prevents to seek judicial resolution or resolution in arbitration. However, one should note that conclusion of a mediation agreement does not suspend the course of the limitation period established by the law (Article 182 of the RK Civil Code). At the same time, under Article 183 of the Civil Code if the parties of the dispute enter into the mediation agreement, that fact interrupts the course of the limitation period and if the parties fail to resolve the dispute, the course of the limitation period starts to count again and the time before the mediation agreement was entered into cannot be included in the new period. If, in contrast, a dispute has been already submitted for the courts resolution, conclusion of the mediation agreement represents a ground for suspension of the respective civil judicial proceedings on the case (Article 23(3) of the Mediation Law). However, the parties of the dispute in this case become responsible for certain notifications addressed to the respective court with respect to the course and results of mediation (please see below). In addition, participants of mediation are responsible to complete mediation in such time as prescribed in Article 23(2) of the Mediation Law since expiration of the respective time period terminates mediation (sub-clause 5 of Article 26 of the Mediation Law). According to Article 242 of the RK Civil Procedural Code the court is obliged (not simply entitled) to suspend respective judicial proceeding in the case when the parties have entered into the mediation agreement. Such suspension shall take place until mediation terminates (Article 244 of the Civil Procedural Court) No specific rules are established with respect to dispute resolution in arbitration on this matter. However general rules on suspension and interruption of the limitation period apply. E. Some specific regulation is provided for in Article 24 of the Mediation Law with respect to mediation taking place in course of criminal proceedings. Particularly, it is established that conclusion of a mediation agreement does not suspend the proceeding with respect to a criminal case, and mediation itself should be completed within the timeframe established by the criminal procedural law for pre-trial and judicial proceedings. Two other provisions of this Article 24 are also important in terms of consideration of any effect which mediation agreement may (or may not) have on future proceedings and status of the parties of mediation. First of all, it is clearly set forth that «the fact of participation in mediation may not be considered as an evidence of admission of guilt by a participant of the proceedings who also acted as the party of mediation». And the second provision include the statement that «refusal to sign a settlement agreement on the conflict may not impair (worsen) position (standing) of the participant of the judicial proceeding who also acted as the party of mediation». It all corresponds to the presumption of innocence and principles of judicial proceedings declared by the RK Constitution (Article 77) and the Criminal Procedural Code (Article 19).
I.4. The mediator: A. According to the definition included in Article 2 of the Mediation Law, the term «mediator» means «an independent individual involved by the parties for conduct of mediation on the professional and non-professional basis in accordance with requirements of this Law». Articles 9 through 11 of Chapter 2 of the Mediation Law relate to the status of mediators. Particularly, according to Article 9 of the Mediation Law, an independent, impartial individual who is (i) not interested in the outcome of affair (ii) who is chosen by the parties of mediation at their mutual consent and (iii) agreed to perform the mediator’s functions provided that (iv) he/she has been included in the register of mediators, can be elected by the parties to a dispute (conflict) as the mediator. In its turn, an individual may not be a mediator if any of the following (as established in Article 9(7)) is applicable to him/her: (i) the person is authorized to perform state (governmental) functions or has a similar status (for example, if the individual occupies a position at any central or local governmental bodies, some of state owned organizations, elected as deputy to the Parliament of the RK or local representative bodies); (ii) the person is recognized by the court as being legally incapable or restricted in his/her capability; (iii) with respect to such person a criminal prosecution is carried out; or (iv) the person has a criminal record remaining not cancelled. As it is set forth in Clause 8 of Article 9, «an agreement between the parties of mediation may establish additional requirements with respect to mediator». The meaning of this provision is not clear. On one hand, if the term «an agreement between the parties of mediation» is meant to relate to a mediation agreement, there is a little sense on establishing any additional requirements concerning a mediator because exactly by the mediation agreement a particular mediator is considered to be appointed and such mediator shall be logically considered to meeting all the requirements. On the other hand, if any other type of agreement between the parties of mediation is meant, there is even less sense in this provision, since there will be no mediator appointed if the parties fail to agree on a particular person and/or such person refuses to sign respective mediation agreement. B. According to Article 9 (5 and 6), activities of mediators (performance of the mediator’s functions) do not constitute an entrepreneurial activity and those who perform as mediators are entitled to be engaged in any other business and activities that are not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. C. As it follows from the legal definition of mediator, there are two acknowledged categories of mediators. Under the first category there professional mediators fall under. The second category includes those mediators who perform their functions on the non-professional basis. The Mediation Law is not sufficiently clear in setting criteria on which this two categories are distinguished. However, it appears that the drafters of the Mediation Law proposed such criteria as entitlement of professional mediators to be paid for performance of the mediation functions. In this respect Article 22(2) of the Mediation Law provides for that professional mediators conduct mediation both for consideration (a fee for mediation) and gratis. In turn, Clause 6 of this Article 22 sets forth that non-professional mediators shall be reimbursed with their expenses (allowed for such reimbursement by the Mediation Law) incurred in connection with mediation. Similarly, Article 21(1) of the Mediation Law proposes that the fee payment terms and conditions shall be essential term of the mediation agreement concluded with a professional mediator. However, there is no prohibition for non-professional mediators to be paid for their performance as mediators. And in general, there is no any rational to prohibit receiving of a consideration for mediator’s services. Eventually, the choice of a mediator and terms of the mediation agreement falls under sole discretion of the parties to the mediation agreement and there is no ground to restrict the freedom-of-a-contract entitlement that the parties enjoy under respective provisions of the RK Civil Code. In connection with this we see the only reason to separate mediators into these two categories which is to offer to the parties of any dispute (conflict) a choice between specially trained mediators who fall under provisions of any professional code of conduct and those individuals who have extensive life experience and gained authority in the society. D. Under Article 9(3) of the Mediation Law a person can carry out activity of mediators on a professional basis if he/she meets the following requirements: (i) he/she is in the age of 25 or older, (ii) he/she has the higher education, (iii) he/she has a document (certificate) confirming the he/she has completed a training under the program of preparation of mediators, and (iv) he/she is included into the register of professional mediators. For non-professional mediators no special certification is required, but, apparently, a certain life experience is expected, since according to Article 9(3) the activity of mediator on a non-professional basis can be carried out by those persons who (i) are at the age of 40 and older, and (ii) are included in a register of nonprofessional mediators. Into the later category of non-professional mediators there members of local community can be also included is they are chosen to conduct a mediation. As Article 15 of the Mediation Law reads, such people can perform as mediators «along with» mediators performing on the non-professional basis. However we see no ground to extinguish another category of mediators in addition to those two that are already described above. Such members of local communities should be better considered also as mediators performing on the non-professional basis: their status is regulated by the same set of rules which regulate all non-professional mediators and they are also subject to inclusion in the same registers as all other mediators acting on the non-professional basis. The only difference is that under Article 15 of the Mediation Law such members of local communities can be elected for their inclusion into the respective mediators’ register as non-professional mediators by a meeting (gathering) of respective local community, whereas other non-professional mediators are expected (obliged, according to Article 16(2) of the Mediation Law) to apply for their inclusion into such registers on their own. One provision of Article 15 of the Mediation Law with respect to setting forth criteria for those people who can be elected as non-professional mediator sounds ambiguous. Particularly, it establishes that a local community can elect to be mediators those members of the community who «have a great life experience, authority and impeccable reputation». As such these criteria can be accepted. However all of them are of a subjective nature and can be differently assessed by different people. What is the sense to include these criteria if there is no provision in the Mediation Law allowing to challenge the election and no legal consequences established for proposing people to be non-professional mediators if to someone’s opinion they do not match the criteria? Inclusion of this and similar provisions into a law are not in compliance with generally accepted requirements of legal technique. E. Regardless of whether it is out-of-court or court-annexed mediation it is the sole discretion of the parties to a dispute (conflict) to choose a mediator who would help them to resolved the dispute (conflict). It is only mutual agreement of the parties is required to elect particular mediator(s). The parties’ choice of particular mediator(s) shall be reflected in their mediation agreement as its essential condition (Article 21(2) of the Mediation Law). The parties are free to voluntary elect the mediator(s) (Articles 9(1) and 20 (7) of the Mediation Law), to decline a mediator (Article 11(1) of the Mediation Law) and to replace the mediator with other chosen mediator (Article 12(1) of the Mediation Law). In all cases of election and replacement of mediator(s) the parties’ mutual agreement is required. However the right to decline a mediator under Clause 1(2)) of Article 11 can be implemented by any of the parties of mediation: in such a case it will mean rejection from the entire mediation and, subject to such declination is made in writing, that will terminate mediation as it is set forth in Article 26 of the Mediation Law. No one can force the parties to agree on having mediation and to make a choice of a mediator(s). However, when mediation takes place in the course of civil or criminal judicial proceeding the parties are required to notify the court or prosecuting agency (as the case may be) about the person(s) they choose as mediator(s) (Article 12(1) of the Mediation Law). F. Article 10 of the Mediation Law establishes what are rights and duties of mediator. Basically, the content and extent of such right and duties are established due to the purpose and nature of mediation. For example, there are only two specific rights of mediators are set forth in this Article 10. The first one entitles mediator to meet the parties of mediation within the course of mediation (with both of them simultaneously and/or with each of them separately) and to give them oral and written recommendation concerning settlement of the dispute (conflict). In addition, mediators are permitted, and they are given a respective right, to inform the public about his/her activity, but with observance of the confidentiality principle established in Article 4 and explained in Article 8 of the Mediation Law. The meaning of this principle is described in more details later in this report. It, however, becomes obvious that formulation of this right of mediators is slightly controversial: from one hand, mediators are entitled to disclose information about their activity as mediator, but, from the other hand, they cannot disclose anything they knew in the course of mediation if they failed to obtain a written permission of a party of the mediation who presented this information in the course of mediation. Under Article 8(3) of the Mediation Law, mediators shall be liable according to respective legislative provisions for unauthorized disclose of the respective information. And, under such regime, it becomes logical that there can no duty of disclosure exist for mediator. According to Article 10(4) of the Mediation Law mediators may have other rights provided for by the RK legislation. There are no specific rights additionally expressed in other legislative acts of regulations at this moment, though some other rights of mediators are provided for in the Mediation Law itself. For example, under Article 12(3) mediator has the right to decline from conduct of mediation, if he/she believes that further efforts in the course of mediation will not lead to settlement. Mediator may also terminate mediation with the consent of the parties of mediation formulated in writing. G. The following duties of mediators are established in Article 10 of the Mediation Law: (i) within the course of mediation mediator is responsible to act only with the consent of the parties of the dispute, and (ii) mediator must (before mediation starts) explain to the parties purposes of mediation and rights and obligations of the parties. Besides, under Article 12(2) of the Mediation Law a mediator must decline to be mediator if certain circumstances preventing performance of the mediator’s functions arise. It should be also considered as a duty of mediators. In addition, according to the aforementioned Article 10, any professional mediator must observe a Code of Professional Ethics of Mediators to be approved by an association (union) of mediators. Mediators may carry out other responsibilities provided for by Kazakhstani legislation. It would be logical to expect any liability established or provided for in Kazakhstani laws for violation of the codes of conduct. However, for example, in the Code of Rules of Conduct for Professional Mediator of the United Center of Mediation and Peacemaking «Mediation» there is no any relevant provision found.[25] At the same time, according to Article 14(7) of the Mediation Law, if a professional mediator violates requirements of this Law, participants of mediation may submit their complaint to the respective organization of mediators which, «upon confirmation of the violation shall suspend activity of the mediator with respective indication of the suspension in the register of professional mediators for the term of six month». This provision can be considered as kind of liability of mediators for breach of their duties. However it appears to have been formulated incorrectly. First of all, it does not indicate how the violation could be confirmed and who is expected to confirm it in order for such confirmation to be reasonable and reliable. Secondly, no any organization of mediators can suspend a mediator’s activity by definition, because each mediator is an independent person to be elected by the parties of mediation without any influence from any side. The organization can only delete the mediator’s data from its register or make other relevant record in the register. Although there are no any additional specific duties or responsibilities of mediators established in other laws and regulations of Kazakhstan, all mediators should observe general responsibilities of any participants of social relations, such as to act reasonably, fairly and in good faith, refrain from causing harm to others, misuse or abuse his/her rights (Article 8 of the Civil Code). H. In contrast, there less responsibilities are set forth in the Mediation Law for the parties of the dispute. They are not obliged to settle their dispute (conflict) in mediation and they can refuse to participate in mediation at their own discretion at any moment (Articles 5(2) and 11(1(3)) of the Mediation Law). They are also entitled, at their mutual agreement, to replace a mediator with another one (Article 12(1) of the Mediation Law). As said above, no one can be force/enforce to choose mediation for dispute resolution, to elect specific person as a mediator, to continue participating in mediation or to enter into a settlement agreement. Article 11(1) of the Mediation Law lists rights of the parties of mediation corresponding to the general approach mentioned in the preceding paragraph. In the line with implementation of this principle of voluntariness of mediation no specific duties for the parties of mediation is set forth in the RK legislation. However, once a settlement agreement is reached, the parties are obliged to implement it according to its terms and conditions (Article 11(2) of the Mediation Law). I. According to Article 13(6) of the Mediation Law an association (union) of mediators is entitled (not obliged) to develop and approve a Code of Professional Ethics of Mediators. Under it legal definition, such association (union) can be created «with the purpose of coordination of activities of organizations of mediators, as well as for protection of their rights and legitimate interests» (sub-clause 3 of Article 2 of the Mediation Law). It is not clear which rights and interests (of mediators or organizations of mediators) are referred to in this legal definition. It seems that the most correct understanding is that it relates to rights and interests of organizations of mediators because according to Article 110 of the RK Civil Code an association (union) is defined as the form of a non-commercial organization created by legal entities (not by individuals) for the purpose of representation and protection of interests of its members/founders only. In general, it seems to be not reasonable to creating any structure to protect rights and interests of mediators as they perform special function to assist in dispute resolution. In connection with this we believe that attaining any special status to mediators to protect such status would not promote the entire idea of mediation. To the extent we are aware there has been no any association (union) of mediators created in Kazakhstan yet. And, therefore, no any Code of Professional Ethics of Mediators approved by such an association (union) exists at this time in Kazakhstan. J. At the same time, the Mediation Law in its Article 2 includes the definition of «organizations of mediators» which are defined as «noncommercial organizations created for association of mediators on a voluntary basis for achievement by them of common aims with respect to development of mediation, provided that such aims do not contradict to legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan». Article 13 of the Mediation Law provides more detailed regulation with respect to status and the role of such organizations of mediators. Particularly it is set forth that, as noncommercial, nongovernmental, self-financed and self-governed organizations created under the initiative of mediators, such organizations of mediators shall be created for the purpose to provide material, organizational and legal and other conditions for rendering service of mediators related to carrying out mediation. For this purpose organizations of mediators are entitled to provide professional training and improvement of professional skill for mediators with delivery of the document (certificate) certifying completion of corresponding courses related to mediation. No special provision providing for adoption of any Code of Conduct for Mediators by any organization of mediators is included in the Mediation Law. However, in absence of an association (union) of mediators which can be set up by organizations of mediators, some of such organizations have adopted their codes of conduct. Above it has been already mentioned such a code adopted by the United Center of Mediation and Peacemaking «Mediation». However this document cannot have its legal effect with respect to professional mediators in the context of their duty to observe a Code of Professional Ethics of mediators as established in Article 10 (4). On websites of other organizations of mediators like the Center of Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution[26] or the Kazakhstani Center of Mediation[27] and some others, no any similar code is found at all. K. Mediation centers established in Kazakhstan are set up as organizations of mediators (those which has been already mentioned above and the most of other) play an important role with regard to development of mediation in Kazakhstan. This role is based on respective provisions of the Mediation Law which establishes for such organizations the purpose to promote development of mediation (Article 2) and empowers them with such rights as training and certification of mediators (Article 13(3)), organizational support of mediation (Article 13(2)) and maintenance of registers of professional mediators. If to address available websites of any of such organizations of mediators, one can find out the following services offered by the aforementioned mediation centers: (i) services on organization and conduct of mediation: mostly, it means organizational support at all stages from election of mediators until mediation completes; the centers can also recommend a candidate to be chosen as mediator if the parties request for such recommendation (Article 20(8) of the Mediation Law); (ii) consulting services to identify a level of proneness to conflict in a company; (iii) accreditation: this means confirmation of compliance of professional level of a specialist to be included into the register of professional mediators maintained by the respective center of mediation. According to Article 14(1) of the Mediation Law each organization of mediators shall form and maintain its register of professional mediators for mediation on the territory of Kazakhstan. This Article 14 sets forth provisions concerning requirements to be met for a person to be included in the register of professional mediators, data which shall be reflected in the register, procedures for inclusion into the register, conditions and procedures for removal form the register, requirements as to public accessibility of the register. It seems that this Article is written with unnecessary details that could be moved down to the level of internal rules of each of the mediators’ organization. But there one of its provisions is of real legal significance and it is reasonably included into this Article. This provision states that, if the organization rejects to include an applicant into its register of professional mediators or excludes him/her from the register, such rejections or exclusion, as the case may be, can be appealed before the court; (iv) training and certification: according to Article 9(4) of the Mediation Law such training must be provided in accordance with programs to be approved in procedure determined by the Government of Kazakhstan. Such Procedure has been approved in the form of the Rules For Undergoing a Study on Programs for Mediators’ Training approved by the Resolution of the RK Government dated July 3, 2011 #770. Model training curriculums on three different programs (such as «General Course of Mediation» for 48 teaching hours, «Specialized Course of Mediation» for 50 teaching hours and «Course for Training Trainers for Mediators» for 32 hours) and a model form of the Certificate to confirm completion of a course has been also approved by this Resolution. L. In addition to existence of registers of professional mediators formed and kept by organizations of mediators (mediation centers) there also registers of nonprofessional mediators can exist. Such registers shall be formed and maintained by local executive authorities, namely by akims of each respective town, settlement or a district in a city. Inclusion into such register shall be done by way of notification, though (at the same time) it is established that each non-professional mediator is obliged to apply to respective local authority to be included into such register. All these requirements together with other rules concerning formation and maintenance of registers of non-professional mediators are established in Article 16 of the Mediation Law.
I.5. The procedure of mediation: A. There the following five principles are set forth in Article 4 of the Mediation Law to serve conduct of mediation: (ii) voluntariness; (iii) equality of rights of parties to mediation; (iv) independence and impartiality of a mediator; (v) inadmissibility of interruption in a mediation procedure, and (vi) confidentiality. Each of these principles is explained in respective Articles of the Mediation Law. Particularly, according to Article 5 of the Mediation Law the principle of voluntariness means, first of all, that no mediation procedure can be started and/or conducted unless all the parties to it express their voluntary will to settle their conflict or dispute by means of mediation: such wills of all parties to mediation shall be declared in a particular agreement on mediation to be entered into by the parties. In addition, this principle means that the parties to mediation are entitled to reject the mediation at any stage of the respective procedure, and although this provision is not so clear, there is no doubt that either party can make such rejection and respective mediation can terminate in both cases when (i) both parties agreed to terminate the procedure and (ii) when either party rejects the mediation. Again, in absence of clear regulation, it appears to be correct point of view that any rejection of mediation shall be made in the express form by either an agreement on termination of mediation or, at least, by formal notice of a party rejection of mediation. And, finally, this principle of voluntariness includes entitlement of the parties to mediation to dispose, at their own discretion, of their material and procedural rights, to increase or decrease amounts of their claims or to refuse of the dispute (conflict), as well as it means the parties’ freedom to choose matters for their discussion of options for mutually acceptable agreement between them (solution). Under Article 6 of the Mediation Law, parties to mediation have equal rights when choosing a mediator, a mediation procedure, their position under such procedure, ways and means to uphold their positions, as well as when receiving any information within the mediation, valuating acceptability of terms and condition of an agreement on settlement of the dispute (conflict). This principle of equality of the parties to mediation also means that the parties have equal obligations associated with respective mediation. The principle of independence of a mediator is explained in Article 7 of the Mediation Law. In particular, it is established that «when conducting mediation a mediator is independent form the parties to the mediation and state authorities, as well as from other legal entities, officials and individuals». This principle also means that each mediator is independent when choosing means and methods of mediation and determining, provided however that such means and/or methods are acceptable under the Mediation Law. To support observance of this principle of mediators’ impartiality, Article 7(2) of the Mediation Law also sets forth such duties of each mediator as (i) to be impartial, (ii) to conduct mediation in interests of both parties to it and (iii) to provide that both parties equally participate in the mediation procedure. A mediator must reject to conduct mediation if there are any circumstances precluding the mediator’s impartiality. According to Article 7(3) of the Mediation Law any interference in a mediator’s activity from the part of persons and entities mentioned in previous paragraph is prohibited with the exception of those cases when such interference is provided for in the laws of Kazakhstan. As an example, such interference is possible when a mediator is suspected of a crime or administrative violation. The principle of confidentiality of conduct of mediation is developed in Article 8 of the Mediation Law. This Article 8 prohibits all participants of mediation (including parties to it and a mediator(s)) to disclose any information they have known in the course of mediation unless they receive a written permission to such disclosure from the party to mediation who provided this information. Any disclosure without such permission of a respective party to mediation entails a liability as provided for by the laws of Kazakhstan. In order to support confidentiality of mediation Article 8(2) of the Mediation Law also sets forth that mediators may not be interrogated as a witness with respect to information they knew in the course of mediation, with the exception of cases provided for by the RK laws. No such case can be identified in the law at this moment. All other provisions of the Mediation Law are construed in compliance with these principles. B. Articles of Chapter 3 of the Mediation Law contain provisions to regulate conduct of mediation. Specific provisions relate to choice of place and time for mediation, language requirements for conducting mediation, conditions for conduct of mediation and some other related issues. According to Article 17 of the Mediation Law, as the basic rule it is set forth that mediation shall be carried out in accordance with the procedure agreed by the parties of mediation which procedure shall not contradict to requirements of the Mediation Law. The parties may agree to apply a procedure (regulations) for conduct of mediation adopted by organizations (any particular one) of mediation. The parties are free to choose a place for mediation and language on which mediation will be carried on. With the parties consent mediator appoints a date and time for mediation (Articles 18 and 19 of the Mediation Law). Among the rules of significant legal importance there are those provisions of the Mediation Law related to duration of mediation and established timeframe for mediation to be conducted. C. Again, the general rule is that a time period for mediation shall be defined by respective mediation agreement, and when mediation is carried on as the out-of-court procedure (i.e. beyond the civil-law or criminal proceedings) all participants of mediation (i.e. the parties and mediator) should do their best to complete the procedure within the period not exceeding 60 calendar days (Article 20(9) of the Mediation Law). In an exceptional case when the dispute (conflict) is very complicated or there is a necessity to gather additional information/documents this time period for the out-of-court mediation can be extended by agreement of the parties and with consent of the mediator. However it cannot be extended for more than another 30 calendar days. A kind of controversial regulation is established in Article 23(1) of the Mediation Agreement according to which when a dispute arisen out of civil-law, labor, family or other relationships with participation of individuals and/or legal entities is brought to be settled in mediation, the mediation should be completed not later than in 30 calendar days after the mediation agreement was entered into. This period can be extended by mutual decision of the parties for another 30 calendar days in case if it is necessary. In total the period for mediation to be completed may not exceed 60 calendar days. Inclusion of this provision into the Mediation Law means that general provision of Article 20(9) of the Mediation Law in terms of respective time limitation can apply to mediation for settlement disputes which cannot be identified as «disputes arisen out of civil-law, labor, family or other relationships with participation of individuals and/or legal entities». But it is difficult to imagine what could be such disputes beyond those arisen out of «other» [which in this case may be understood as any] relationships. It also worth to mention that parties of a dispute are not limited in their attempts to settle the dispute in a number of mediations following each other and, to the extent it is reasonable, even taking place simultaneously. For each of such separate out-of-court mediations separate time limits would apply. D. In Article 23(1) of the Mediation Agreement according to which, when mediation is chosen to settle a dispute arisen out of civil-law, labor, family or other relationships with participation of individuals and/or legal entities which has been already brought to court, the mediation should be also completed not later than in 30 calendar days after the mediation agreement was entered into. This period can be extended by mutual decision of the parties for another 30 calendar days in case if it is necessary. In total the period for mediation to be completed may not exceed 60 calendar days. In any case of such extension the parties must jointly inform the court in writing about the extension.
Доступ к документам и консультации
от ведущих специалистов |