233 KB43 KB201320252022Pogorelčnik Vogrinc, Nežaletnik:48številka:6/7str. 1184-1195ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID_HOST:126064899URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-OWRVM7H0slLEXPERAPodjetje in deloADRalternative dispute resolutionalternativno reševanje sporovARSCouncil of EuropeDirective 2008/52Direktiva 2008/52European UnionEvropska unijamandatory mediationmediacijamediationobvezna mediacijaReševanje sporovSvet EvropeAlternativno reševanje sporov v pravu EU in Sveta Evrope|The development of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Europe slowly follows the development in the US. While ADR is well established in some European Union (EU) Member States, it has never taken off in others. The EU and the Council of Europe therefore play an important role in promoting ADR by recommending or obliging Member States to introduce such alternative procedures. Despite all the efforts, even mediation, the most commonly used ADR procedure, does not reach the desired level of use in practice. On average, mediation is only used in about 1% of disputes in the EU, which shows the potential that this method still has. Solving a dispute in mediation means lower costs for the parties, a shorter process, fewer cases going to court, and greater satisfaction of the parties with the agreement reached. Since the current incentives to use ADR have not had the desired effect, mandatory mediation is proposed as a possible next step. However, is the introduction of mandatory mediation even possible under the existing EU legal framework and would such a step really be a cure for (all) the problems of national judicial systems?Razvoj postopkov alternativnega reševanja sporov (ARS) v Evropi počasi sledi ZDA. Medtem ko so se v nekaterih državah članicah Evropske unije tovrstni načini reševanja sporov dodobra uveljavili, v drugih niso nikoli zaživeli. Pomembno vlogo pri njihovi promociji imata zato EU ter Svet Evrope, ki državam članicam uvedbo tovrstnih postopkov priporočata oziroma jih k temu zavezujeta. Kljub vsem prizadevanjem pa niti mediacija, ki je najpogosteje uporabljen postopek, v praksi ne dosega želenega obsega. Mediacija naj bi se v EU v povprečju izvedla le v približno 1 odstotku sporov, kar kaže, da ta način reševanja sporov ponuja še precej možnosti za uporabo. Rešitev spora v mediaciji pomeni nižje stroške za stranke, krajši postopek, manjši pripad zadev na sodišče ter večje zadovoljstvo strank s sklenjenim sporazumom. Ker dosedanje spodbude k uporabi ARS ne prinašajo želenega učinka, se kot možen naslednji korak ponuja obvezna mediacija. Toda ali je uvedba obvezne mediacije glede na obstoječo pravno ureditev EU sploh mogoča in ali bi bil takšen korak res zdravilo za (vse) težave pravosodnih sistemov posameznih držav?TEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia