Radio National Transcripts:

Susanna Lobez: Hello everyone. Welcome to The Law Report's special inside look at mediation.

Life is very short for fussing and fighting, and expensive court battles. Hence the government's recent justice package supports alternative dispute resolution, like mediation. Courts also encourage alternatives to full-on, guns-blazing, adversarial litigation. So it's all systems go for mediation. But customers are staying away. Perhaps people just want their day in court, with a judge to decide who wins and who loses. Or perhaps they don't understand how mediation works.

A mediator doesn't act as a judge but as a neutral third party who helps people in dispute reach a creative solution to their conflict which both can live with. Mediation is conducted in strict confidence and nothing anybody says can be used later in a court, so we couldn't record a real mediation. But The Law Report was invited to be a fly on the wall at a mediation session put together to train bank employees.

The story's a familiar one. Kevin's a builder. He asked his mum, Josephine, to be a director of his company. Kevin borrowed $500,000 from the bank to build units. Kevin and Jo, as company directors, guaranteed the loan. The deal went bad. The bank moved in and sold up the units. But there was a shortfall of $150,000. The parties agree to mediation and to split the costs fifty fifty. Jo and Kevin turn up with their lawyer, Nicole. Bank manager Barry and executive Chris are there with the bank's lawyer, Gary. At the outset, Jonathan Mott, a senior lawyer and trained mediator, explains that it's best to focus on overall interests because getting stuck on rights leads to the courtroom.

Jonathan Medwin: First, my name is Jonathan Medwin, I'm a lawyer and a mediator, qualified with the Australian Commercial Disputes Centre. It's also called 'ACDC', but I prefer the long description. Can I ask whether you have the authority between you to settle this dispute? It will assist us greatly if, for example, Barry and Chris for the bank, and Jo and Kevin, you can be treated as masters of your own destiny so that if some form of agreement is reached here, you can agree to it on the spot, you don't have to refer to anyone.

Kevin: No problems with Mum and I.

Jonathan Medwin: No problems with you and Mum? Good.

Barry: No, the bank's well represented in that regard, Jonathan. We can settle this today if necessary.

Jonathan Medwin: All right. The mediation process: first of all, it's important for you to realise it's voluntary. There's nothing keeping you at this table, except the realistic prospect that you may reach an agreement. The mediation process needs to be confidential. Anything you say here must remain with you and cannot be used by one of you against another in any court proceedings. The essence of a mediation is that you control the process. I'm not here to act as a judge or a decision maker. I'm here to help you reach an agreement, and I don't have to say to you at the end of the day, "Yes, Jo," or "Yes, Barry, that's fair and I recommend that you accept it." All it has to be is an agreement you can live with.

Kevin: Jonathan, I can't understand why we're even here, I'm a little bit confused in a lot of ways, although we've agreed to come, because I said to Barry that we'll sort things out. And now the bank wants to go into this mediation process. Why can't I just talk it over with Barry?

Jonathan Medwin: Kevin, you had a discussion with Barry previously. And you haven't produced any results yet. But my perception at this stage is that there's a fair history to this?

Kevin: Yeah, but I always told Barry that I would pay back the money, and he won't accept it!

Jonathan Medwin: Okay.

Barry: Yeah, but Kevin, obviously you have said that you have no capacity to repay it, so..

Kevin: I, I'm going to get the money. No problems.

Barry: It's easy to agree to repay it when you, when you can't.

Jo: I heard from Chris Fountain that he's going to be issuing some proceedings against me, I can't understand the grounds behind it. Kevin here has been handling all his business affairs and just asked me to sign as a director, and this is my involvement. Now I've been called up to the courts and it's most embarrassing, this situation, I've never been in this sort of predicament in my whole life.

Jonathan Medwin: Well, let's hope that we can avoid the courts, and see this as a better alternative.

Jo: Well I can tell you if there's no agreement here that I will take it to court.

Jonathan Medwin: Right. Well, it's a fluid process, mediation. Can I just say this, that I expect that there will be some pretty robust dialogue across the table from time to time. But we shouldn't be shrinking violets and get too embarrassed. I just ask you to try and avoid too extreme language. When we develop some better understanding, I think, of where either side's coming from, we can start working out the most important issues and then see if there are one or more than one way of resolving this.

Because that's the difference between mediation and a court. In court, it's one wins and one loses. But here, there's lots of different ways, if you turn your mind to it, that you might be able to resolve a dispute of this nature. We hope that while you're thinking about the facts, thinking about what the other's said, you've got your creative cap on as well, okay? Because we need to accommodate one another, we need to come to this table with the willingness to compromise. All right?

Chris: Well who's going to speak first?

Barry: Okay, well look, I'll outline the position of the bank...

Jonathan Medwin: Are you happy with that?

Barry: ...if I could. The company approached the bank for financial accommodation in around about May of 1992, to the tune of $500,000. The purpose of the advance was to assist with the completion of units. The matter was assessed by the bank, both financially and commercially. We duly committed to that loan. It is history now, but in July, approximately July of 1993, arrears developed and we were forced into a position of forcing the sale of the property.

Kevin: That's right, if you hadn't have forced it, we wouldn't have lost money. If you'd let things go and gave me time to settle, you would have got your money back.

Chris: Kevin, let me just outline the position as I see it. The property was sold, leaving a shortfall to the bank of $150,000. The bank is entitled to recover that $150,000, and they are the facts as we see them.

Jo: Can I interrupt here? Your records show that everything has been carried out in the correct manner. Well, I've never seen or spoken with yourself, I've never seen or spoken with Barry.

Barry: I find what you're saying, Jo, to be rather disturbing. Because you're suggesting that, perhaps, what? You didn't sign the documents? You claim you have..

Jo: I've never seen any of those documents! All that Kevin showed me and told me was that he was going to require a person to be a director of a company..

Barry: So back in May '92, did you sign any papers for the bank?

Jo: No, no papers were at all given to me by the bank to sign.

Barry: Well we've got what purports to be your signature on three documents; the acceptance of the offer for the loan, the mortgage over the property, and the guarantee as a director.

Jo: Ah, I only signed documents as a director, for Kevin to establish as I said, his business.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay.

Jo: And yet, through my lawyers I asked for proof of documentation that I signed for the bank, and they showed me this guarantee. I'm not disagreeing with it, it looks like my signature, but it's been witnessed by you, Barry. When did we meet?

Barry: I've been manager of that branch for ten years. I've written thousands of loans in that time. I would honestly have to say that I'm not going to remember the face of every...

Kevin: Well Mum and I have had a bit of an argument about this, because I think I've set Mum up, but she didn't see you Barry, and much as I like you, you sent the documents out to me and I took them along to a cup of coffee with Mum and I said, "Oh, there's a whole lot of things about the company"...

Nicole: Look, if I could just interrupt, Kevin, I'm sorry. Really to simplify, Kevin admits liability for this debt. Jo emphatically denies liability for the debt. She does say that it is her signature but she has never seen those documents before. I have advised her that in a court of law she would not be found liable for that debt.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay. Thanks, Nicole. Now, the bank says its claim is $150,000 in round terms?

Chris: That's right.

Jonathan Medwin: How much of that is interest?

Chris: I haven't got the figure exactly in front of me, but certainly there is a component of interest included in that.

Jonathan Medwin: Well, would it be reasonable to say it might be a 30-40% component of the 150?

Chris: Presumable around about that figure, yeah.

Jonathan Medwin: Well, anything you'd like to say, Kevin?

Kevin: I've told the bank I admit liability for the debt, and I will pay it back. And Barry and I had talks about it, and I will pay it back, I've got a couple of irons in the fire, and there's no doubt that in six months time I'll have the money to be able to pay it. But just leave Mum out of it, trying to take her home and her money, and I don't want it, and that's why I'm getting angry. So, can we just work it out between me and the bank.

Barry: Can I make one point here?

Jonathan Medwin: Mm hmm.

Barry: The bank has not indicated to Jo that we will be turfing her out of her home. We do not hold any mortgage over any home that may or may not be held by Jo.

Chris: Jo, keep in mind you're a company director. Irrespective of your age, irrespective of the fact that you are the mother of Kevin, and Kevin was the main driving force behind the company, you should be aware of certain rights and obligations as a company director.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay, and if I could suggest that we now have some time out. You have your lawyers, I think you...

Susanna Lobez: At this stage, the parties separate. At the round table, Jo said she's not liable because no one explained the loan documents or guarantee to her. This could weaken the bank's case, especially since Barry can't find a diary note about witnessing Jo's signature. Kevin accepts the debt but hasn't made any attempts to pay the bank off. When mediator Jonathan talks to the bank team, he gets them thinking about the weak links in their case and what kind of a discount they could live with.

Jonathan Medwin: Well I suppose you've seen hundreds of these before, haven't you?

Chris: Yes, Jonathan, unfortunately it's a familiar scene.

Barry: The classic case.

Chris: We're faced with it regularly, aren't we Barry? It's disappointing, but nonetheless a common occurrence. Look, Jonathan, I think we recognise that our case against Jo is not one that we want to push. We obviously would prefer to push Kevin as much as possible, and try and get Jo to assist with whatever options are available to us. Now look, Kevin has committed himself verbally on a couple of occasions to Barry.

Jonathan Medwin: Is he a pretty good builder?

Barry: Well yeah, he was well renowned, when he came to me he was building a lot of homes.

Chris: It's not clear to us completely as to the financial position with either of the two parties.

Barry: It comes to the crunch and I ask him questions, you know, how can we get him to repay some of this, he won't reveal any information.

Chris: The bank's obviously preferring to get, naturally enough, $150,000, and we're not here today thinking that we're going to get that. Now, it's fairly clear that Kevin doesn't have the capacity to come up with...

Barry: I don't think we're going to get it in this case. I don't think you'll get a lump sum.

Chris: So we may have to look at perhaps suggesting some alternatives.

Barry: I'm just wondering whether the opportunity of a guarantee perhaps from Jo, secured by her house?

Jonathan Medwin: If I could just comment on that. It's not my place to say yes or no. And that may well be capable of being achieved. But from my perception of what Jo is saying, I wouldn't put too many bets on the fact that she will agree to give any security or to agree. So you need probably to have a fall-back position.

Barry: I just had the impression she was prepared to help her son in business, you know.

Jonathan Medwin: You can see what happens. A couple of other things, Barry. This is not a comment that I necessarily endorse or not, but there's an allegation there that's potentially damaging, isn't there? From Jo, at the bank.

Barry: Oh, look, I acknowledge that.

Jonathan Medwin: I don't know how the bank sees that, but., ah...

Barry: Well I've gone through our file book, normally I would have made a diary note. I cannot find a diary note.

Jonathan Medwin: It may well be a good reason for resolving this here if you can. It doesn't do the bank any...

Barry: Oh yeah. Well I think that's partially why we're here.

Jonathan Medwin: Gary, how do you assess the chances of the bank against Jo?

Gary: Well I think that the chances of beating her are very good, Jonathan. I think Barry is a very credible witness and will present well in court, and whilst we certainly have a few deficiencies in relation to his evidence in regard to a lack of a diary note and perhaps his lack of being able to identify Jo, I think that he would come over very well in the witness box.

Chris: It must be pointed out to Jo that she has got a liability in the matter, she can't simply sit there and say that I've got no liability.

Barry: We lent to the company, we didn't lend to Kevin, we lent to the company.

Chris: In view of that, she may very well be prepared to come up with some proposal herself.

Jonathan Medwin: Chris, I asked the question about the interest, because the bank may well say to itself, "Well look, it would be nice to be talking about the 150, but if there's any concessions in the amounts going to be made, we might start by knocking off the interest'.

Chris: Well naturally, Jonathan, we believe that the figure of $100,000 is acceptable. We would prefer to see $100,000 in a lump sum.

Barry: If it takes fifteen years to get it, you may as well accept 50,000 lump sum now.

Chris: Certainly, look, the longer these things go, the more costs there are to the bank to administer.

Jonathan Medwin: Without saying this is coming from the bank, if we're talking about terms and money, on the one hand, could I say, and you may well get a discount for cash if you could find some money somewhere?

Chris: Sure.

Gary: You've mentioned that we'd accept 100,000 without interest over a period of time. But you said fifteen years wouldn't be acceptable. What period would be acceptable to you? Five years?

Barry: Well, the shorter the better, obviously.

Chris: We need to know some financial details of these people before we can go much further.

Jonathan Medwin: I'll put it to them. They may or may not be prepared to answer it, of course. Kevin seems to me a volatile type.

Barry: Oh, he does fire up occasionally.

Jonathan Medwin: Is he the sort of fellow that if he's pushed too hard, will just walk out? Even if Mum's...?

Barry: Well I just detect there's a bit of friction, between them. As she said, he's put her in an awkward position. We may have to help him get into a situation generating income so that he can pay back the 100,000.

Chris: That again, I repeat, as far as I'm concerned Barry, that's not the preferable way to settle this. Certainly we could look at that option, we're not rejecting any options.

Barry: Well what are you going to suggest? That Mum sell the house?

Chris: Well let's leave it up to them, Barry.

Jonathan Medwin: I think it might be probably time for me to go them now, Barry.

Gary: Jonathan, you would not be mentioning amounts at this stage?

Jonathan Medwin: I understood you to say I could mention a hundred, but er...

Gary: I'd prefer, what I'd prefer is for them to put to you what they're prepared to give, rather than us come up with our figure at this stage.

Jonathan Medwin: All right.

Garry: Just two other points. They must be aware that it's going to cost them at least $20,000 to proceed this to a trial. Kevin should also be aware of the fact that a bankruptcy, which is a possible option if we can't settle, is going to impinge on his ability to remain in business.

Jonathan Medwin: There's one thing that we haven't discussed yet, and that is the company's liquidation for the Tax Office.

Barry: Oh look, I think the company's gone. I've got the feeling he's setting up a new company.

Jonathan Medwin: Gary, presumably it would be possible for the Tax Office to go to the directors direct, wouldn't it?

Gary: Most certainly.

Jonathan Medwin: So that probably heightens the importance of your trying to settle today, rather than let yourself go through the litigation process, by which time the AGO... will dive in first, where you've got no security, have you?

Chris: I'm not too sure whether there's gold bars under the bed, or whether there are Rolls Royces sitting in the background, I truly don't know the financial position of these people. Whilst it is likely that they are impecunious, let's ask them to give us their position...

Barry: You may have to flush out an offer...

Chris: Well, look...

Barry: ..By dangling a carrot, an offer of a substantial discount.

Chris: The bank is prepared, Barry, to settle this matter. All I'm saying is that can we please just be presented with some facts before we go any further.

Barry: I think we should be saying that we're prepared to make some concession, either by repayment over a period of time without interest, or acceptance of a reduced amount or both. Give them some incentive to come back with an offer.

Chris: Well, I get back to...

Barry: You may as well have gone to court if you want the full amount of court: You're wasting your time.

Gary: Well, I don't think at this point that Chris has indicated that he wants the full amount, but he just wants some more information in order to satisfy himself as to what the figure the bank should settle on, and I don't think that's an unreasonable stance.

Jonathan Medwin: Fair enough. I think I should talk to them now, shouldn't I?

Barry: Sure.

Gary: Okay.

Chris: All right.

Susanna Lobez: Despite the fact that Jo may be liable as a company director, the bank's realistic. It knows a voluntary settlement in the hand is worth more than a costly judgment in the court.

You're listening to The Law Report on Radio National and we're flies on the wall at a mediation between the bank who wants its $150,000, and Kevin and his Mum Jo, who can't afford to pay. Jonathan's task now, with Kevin and Jo, is to get the financial details from Kevin and to flush out an offer approaching 100,000 which allows for a discount of interest owed. He's careful not to push too hard, because if Kevin and Jo's company is in liquidation the bank will have a hard time getting any money.

Jonathan Medwin: Well I've had a useful discussion with the bank, as you can see by the time we've taken. How have you progressed?

Nicole: Look Jonathan, we've had a difficult time. Jo's pretty upset about the whole situation.

Jonathan Medwin: I can see that.

Nicole: Obviously, she doesn't want to be part of any litigation whatsoever. She really just wants to stay right out of this dispute. Both my clients really want to make this matter go away, they don't really know on what terms the bank is prepared to settle.

Jonathan Medwin: Kevin, I'd be interested to know how you feel you'll be able to meet the obligation.

Kevin: I've got this really good deal going. And as you know, as a builder I'm well respected, I had a very good history until this disaster with these units. I don't want the bank to bankrupt me because I'm director of this new company. I've imported some terracotta from Italy, I've got the bill of lading and they will sell over the next two years for around about $140-150,000. Guaranteed. And that's where I was going to pay the bank from.

Jonathan Medwin: Well that of itself won't produce enough, because you've got living expenses and an apartment.

Nicole: Kevin just needs a bit of a break at the moment, he needs the bank to get off his back, to put it bluntly. If the bank pulls all of its guns out right now and goes through with the litigation, I don't believe it will get a judgment against Jo. And it'll get a judgment against Kevin but it will be worthless, it'll be an empty judgment.

Jonathan Medwin: The bank wants to know your financial position.

Kevin: That's easy. I've got nothing at the moment. But really good prospects.

Nicole: What he would like to see happen is some sort of arrangement come to whereupon part of this debt can be paid at a later time, perhaps over instalments. Jo is prepared to put in a little bit of money, and certainly neither of my clients want to have any judgment entered against them in any court proceedings. We'd want the whole thing to be quite confidential.

Jo: Kevin and I, we have our differences, I know, I'm still very very angry with him on the position that he's put me into, but I have a little bit of money which I have put away, I'm prepared to give him some of those funds towards making the offer to the bank, provided no action is taken against me. Otherwise, as I said, they can take me. In this respect, I still feel that the bank has not done the correct thing in advising me.

Jonathan Medwin: Nicole, is this the way you're putting it, that if Jo puts some money up she'll get a release? Is that what you're saying?

Nicole: Absolutely.

Jonathan Medwin: And how much? It would have to be something of some substance, I guess, wouldn't it?

Jo: Well at this point, because I have living expenses in that respect, I'm prepared to give $15,000.

Kevin: Would they accept $15,000?

Jonathan Medwin: The bank hasn't told me. But it's only 10%.

Kevin: Well that's about all the cash we can afford at the moment.

Jonathan Medwin: So, it's your mother's money. You don't have any contacts who would advance monies to you at this stage?

Jo: No, Kevin has just started, as you've heard, his business.

Jonathan Medwin: Yes. They know about it. They know about your business venture. You've got some credibility with Barry. You've got no assets. They may take a cocktail of cash and terms, I don't know. You would still be saying you would put $15,000 up, I take it, for a release?

Jo: Yes.

Jonathan Medwin: Just wondering whether he could borrow some moneys from somewhere to get rid of them. I mean, that's what you both want, isn't it? You really want to get this monkey off your back.

Jo: We definitely do. But can't the bank forgive the interest component at least, of that debt?

Jonathan Medwin: Well if you take the interest off the top, as Jo suggests, and I think that's pretty creative, 30-40% off the top of the head is between 45-60,000 off the top, isn't it? So you're getting down to a figure of something like 100,000.

Kevin: No, I can't afford 100,000. No way.

Jonathan Medwin: No, we're talking, not cash.

Kevin: The most I can find over the next two years is probably 50,000. If they give me time, and they don't charge any interest, I can pay the whole lot back over the next five or six years.

Jonathan Medwin: Well, are you talking of something around 90-110, with the 15,000 down, over five years. Is that what you're saying?

Kevin: No, I'm getting out of my depth here.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay. Well I don't want you to do that.

Kevin: No, I better let Nicole take over.

Nicole: Certainly, when we had some private discussions, Kevin indicated to me that having done all of his figures and looked at the finances of his new joint venture, that he would be able to repay the sum of $50,000 over a two year period. He's not quite sure what lies ahead in the future, and he wants the bank to be a little bit flexible in relation to this arrangement. But he did indicate to me that on his assessment of the figures, if he was to be liable for more than, say, $50,000, it wouldn't really be an attractive proposition for him, he might as well go bankrupt right now.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay. But what's the deal, then, Nicole?

Nicole: The bank could take charge over the assets of the business. This new joint venture does have some stock.

Jonathan Medwin: And the partner? He would consent?

Kevin: Yeah, he will.

Jonathan Medwin: So one, charge over assets of business.

Kevin: And the stock's worth 50,000.

Jonathan Medwin: So we're talking 15,000 cash, with release for Jo. A further 50,000 from Kevin over two years. Well, is 5,000 a quarter and advanced at the end of two years, that's 20 and then five five five five, and then ten at the end of it.

Kevin: That's 20,000 a year.

Jonathan Medwin: Yeah.

Kevin: Yeah, we can do that.

Jonathan Medwin: All right. Well, one last thing. If they're prepared to give you more time are you prepared to pay more?

Kevin: Well I've got no other deals on the go at the moment. No, that's all I've got. They can bankrupt me.

Jonathan Medwin: Okay. how do we handle this now, then. I talk to them...?

Susanna Lobez: In the next stage of the mediation, Kevin provides details of his assets, liabilities and income likely from his new importing venture with his partner. The bank was hoping for 100,000. But after further chats, Nicole offers 65,000 - 15 from Jo immediately and 50 from Kevin over two years, secured by a charge over the assets of the business.

Jonathan Medwin: Alright Chris, well, I'm pleased to see that...

Chris: We've progressed so quickly.

Jonathan Medwin: There's an offer on the table, you've given it serious consideration. You have the statement of assets and liabilities now, and I take it you don't wish to take that any further at this stage.

Chris: No, not really.

Jonathan Medwin: I think we're all waiting to hear the bank's response to the substantial proposal.

Chris: Well look, there's no doubt that we came here with some preconceived ideas of what was a reasonable figure. And it has been somewhat difficult being able to confirm that figure without the facts. Now that we've got some facts, we are somewhat close to what we believe is acceptable, and at this particular point in time I'd like to refer to Gary to get his thoughts and opinions.

Gary: Well it would seem to me that the offer that's on the table is the basis of the financial statements that we've got. Perhaps it's well worth considering the offer, subject to what instructions if there are any variations or increased figure or change in the mix of the figures that perhaps you would want to look at.

Barry: Well that's a point I would like to take up. It appears Kevin's offer for two years indicates a capacity to repay there and the figure's well short of the debt. I had in mind that if we were going to settle that it would be more than what you're offering. I'm wondering if a three year term of repayment, in other words extend it by another year which would be another $20,000.

Kevin: You're talking about a total of $75,000. There's no way that can be paid in a lump sum.

Jonathan Medwin: We're at 65 now, we're 15,000 down and 5,000 every quarter. The 15 down gives Jo release. What did you want to add, if anything, to that?

Chris: Well look, I would prefer to see a higher figure from Jo.

Kevin: I can't do anything more, Chris.

Chris: Look, we're probably close to a reasonable figure. I would say that the sum of, say, $25,000 in cash from Jo.

Jo: Oh you must be kidding. I'm going to take this to court. There's no way known, as I said to you, I'm liable for the debt. That's it. I'm going to walk out of here. I've had enough.

Kevin: Hold on Mum, hold on, hold on. Look, I'll put in another $5,000. All right, that means, let's say we make it 15,000 from you, and that lets you off the hook. And I pay 55,000 over 30 months, two and a half years.

Jonathan Medwin: If you do reach settlement here, and I'm pleased to say we're pretty close, we need to sign an agreement. Now sorry, Chris, I think you were about to come back and respond to what Kevin had put to you, which was an additional 5,000.

Chris: Well, I recognise the position that both the parties are in. I'm prepared to accept the offer of releasing Jo on receipt of a sum of money. But what we haven't come to full agreement on is the sum in question. Is there any possibility of getting that figure increased to, say, $20,000? I'm prepared to release Jo from her liability in full upon the receipt of $20,000.

Jo: You're definitely not going to change your mind this time?

Chris: Well, it would be documented in a settlement agreement, Jo.

Jonathan Medwin: Kevin, you put the 5,000 extra you came up with at the back end. Could you bring $5,000 to the front end and pay it at the same time as Mum?

Kevin: Yeah, we can do that, we can do that.

Chris: And Kevin, the figure that you're talking about appears reasonable. I would prefer to see that improved upon, but I don't know that I think we're being unrealistic asking you to up that. So that would mean that we've got $20,000 in a lump sum to release your mother, you're committed to payment of 50,000 over a two year term. On that basis I think we've got something that's acceptable. Gary, I think that's close to acceptable, is it?

Gary: Most certainly. Yes, I would recommend to you that you accept that offer.

Jonathan Medwin: Good. Well, congratulations. It's been achieved with good will on both sides, not without a bit of pain. I'd like you to shake hands on the deal now... and not come out fighting...

All: (laughter) Thanks.

Susanna Lobez: A settlement agreement is prepared and signed, and they all lived happily ever after. And I thank all the participants, and Anita Barraud for production help this week.

If you're involved in a dispute and you think mediation is worth a try, tell your lawyer or call your local justice department or law society for further information.

Thanks for your company for The Law Report. We'll see you next week.

---

This is a transcript of the Law Report as originally broadcast on Radio National, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's national radio network of ideas.