When must a mediator say 'enough'?
In March 2024, we interrupted a mediation process in Warsaw exactly in the 42nd minute of the meeting. The decision to withdraw from handling a case is not a failure, but a hard tool that protects the interests of both sides and the purity of rules in business.
Conflict of interest discovered over time
In the work of a mediator at Arka Przymierza, situations occur where impartiality is questioned through no fault of ours. During a session in October 2023, it turned out that one of the partners of a limited liability company from Gdansk had collaborated 4 years earlier with a subcontractor whom I know privately. Even though the relationship was loose, ethical principles are inexorable. Discretion is our standard, not a promise, which is why we immediately reported this fact to both parties to the dispute.
Even if the parties declare that it doesn't bother them, the law and professional ethics command caution. In that case, the dispute concerned the amount of 147,000 PLN and the division of 3 key production machines. Further leading of the talks by the same person could undermine the entire settlement in court. We close disputes, we open businesses, but only on healthy foundations. We transferred the case to another specialist from our 5-person team, which allowed completing the process in 11 business days without a shadow of a doubt.
Impartiality is not a choice of the mediator, it is a hard foundation without which the settlement will fall apart at the first control.
Lack of good will in negotiations
Mediation is not a magic trick that will force someone to change their mind against their interest. If one of the parties comes to the meeting only to extract confidential data from a competitor or deliberately prolong the process for another 3 months, we must react. We talk specifically about numbers, and if we see that one person avoids answering simple questions about the 2023 balance sheet, we know we are wasting time.
In June 2024, we conducted mediation between the board and the supervisory board of a certain holding. After 3 meetings, each of which lasted exactly 2.5 hours, we realized that the president deliberately does not provide 12 key financial reports. This was the moment when Arka Przymierza said 'enough'. We do not allow our name to legitimize simulated actions. Interrupting talks at such a moment often works refreshingly on the other side and forces it into a real approach to the problem.
Violence and power imbalance
The mediator must ensure that both parties have the same chance to speak. Often in disputes between a minority shareholder (e.g. 18% share) and a majority owner (82%), attempts at intimidation occur. If threats occur at the meeting or one person systematically shouts down the other, mediation makes no sense. We save transactions on the edge, but not at the cost of participants' dignity.
I remember a situation from November 2023, where one side tried to use a financial advantage, suggesting that it would destroy the other side with court processes lasting 6 years if they didn't sign a dividend waiver. At Arka Przymierza, we then use a session interruption procedure. We give the parties 48 hours to cool down. If after this time the tone of the conversations does not change, we end the cooperation. Respect is a currency that cannot be replaced by any transfer.
Reaching the competence boundary
We are conflict and communication specialists, but we are not property appraisers or construction engineers. When a dispute over asset distribution worth 3.2 million PLN begins to revolve around technical details of concrete strength, we must hit the brake. A mediator cannot advise or decide who is right in substantive issues. That is a role for court experts.
In such situations, we propose suspending the mediation for 14 days so that the parties can provide an opinion from an independent expert. If the parties refuse and expect that we will 'judge' the dispute, we refuse to continue the case. Our task is to facilitate agreeing, not being a judge. In 2023, we had 7 such cases where setting a clear boundary saved the process from later claims of professional error.
A mediator who pretends to be an expert on everything is the biggest threat to the success of your company.
Legal issues and illegal actions
The most obvious situation in which we must stop working is a suspicion of committing a crime. If during talks about profit distribution it turns out that part of the income came from undocumented sources or invoices were forged in the years 2021-2022, mediation must end. We cannot be part of a deal that breaks Polish tax or criminal law.
Such a situation has happened to us only once in the last 4 years, but it showed how important hard rules are. We protect our clients' interests, but we act exclusively within the limits of applicable regulations. As soon as a proposal was made to enter fictitious costs into the settlement, Marek Jastrzębski ended the session within 3 minutes. A clear conscience and the impeccable opinion of Arka Przymierza are more important to us than the commission from even the largest settlement.
