Court Annexed Mediation (CAM) | Pre-trial (RULE 18) | CIVIL PROCEDURE

COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION (CAM) IN THE PHILIPPINES
(A Comprehensive Overview)

I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND POLICY BASIS

  1. Constitutional and Statutory Foundations

    • The 1987 Philippine Constitution encourages the amicable settlement of disputes to promote access to justice and ease court dockets.
    • Republic Act No. 9285 (Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004) broadly promotes ADR mechanisms, including mediation, conciliation, and arbitration.
    • The Supreme Court, through various circulars and administrative issuances (e.g., A.M. No. 01-10-SC-PHILJA and subsequent amendments), institutionalized Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) for civil and certain criminal cases (particularly those covered by the Katarungang Pambarangay Law or those subject to settlement).

  2. Role of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA)

    • PHILJA is the Supreme Court’s implementing arm for judicial education and ADR training.
    • It spearheads the establishment, administration, and monitoring of mediation centers in designated court stations.
    • PHILJA trains and accredits mediators who shall conduct CAM sessions.

II. DEFINITION AND NATURE OF COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION

  1. Definition

    • Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) is a mandatory dispute resolution process, under court supervision, where an impartial, accredited mediator facilitates communication, negotiation, and settlement among litigants in a pending case.
    • It is distinct from private mediation in that it occurs after the filing of a case in court and is guided by specific Supreme Court rules.

  2. Goals and Objectives

    • Decongest court dockets by reducing the number of fully litigated cases.
    • Shorten the time for dispute resolution and thereby reduce litigation costs.
    • Encourage mutually satisfactory solutions and preserve relationships among parties.

  3. Key Features

    • Neutral mediator: An accredited mediator who facilitates discussions but does not impose a decision on the parties.
    • Voluntariness in settlement: While attending mediation is mandatory once ordered by the court, the actual acceptance of a compromise remains voluntary.
    • Confidentiality: All disclosures and admissions made during mediation are generally confidential and inadmissible in evidence if mediation fails.

III. SCOPE AND COVERAGE

  1. Civil Cases

    • CAM typically applies to civil cases, including but not limited to:
      • Collection of sum of money, damages, and contractual disputes;
      • Family disputes (with some exceptions involving status of persons, e.g., nullity of marriage);
      • Intra-corporate controversies (where ADR is not barred by law or corporate charters and certain special laws); and
      • Other cases that the Supreme Court may refer to mediation.

  2. Special Laws and Exceptions

    • Some special proceedings, such as those relating to annulment or nullity of marriage, legal separation, child abuse, or other cases involving public policy, are not subject to CAM.
    • Criminal cases are generally excluded except in instances where the law or the Supreme Court expressly allows settlement (e.g., offenses covered by the Katarungang Pambarangay process or those that are essentially civil in nature, like slight physical injuries with indemnity).
    • The court exercises discretion in deciding whether a case is fit for mediation, guided by Supreme Court issuances.

IV. PROCEDURE AND TIMELINE

  1. Referral from the Pre-trial Stage

    • Under Rule 18 (Pre-trial), once the court determines that the dispute can be settled, the judge orders the parties to appear for Court-Annexed Mediation.
    • This referral typically happens after the issues are joined and before trial on the merits, ensuring that settlement avenues are explored early.

  2. Mediation Order and Submission

    • The court issues an order directing the parties to go to the accredited Mediation Center and designates the mediator or instructs the parties to select from a list of accredited mediators.
    • The parties are required to appear personally, unless given express permission to send authorized representatives with full settlement authority.
    • Counsel are encouraged to attend but must allow the parties to participate meaningfully in the mediation discussions.

  3. Mediation Conference(s)

    • The mediator schedules and conducts mediation sessions in a setting conducive to open communication.
    • Separate caucuses (private meetings) with each party may be held to further clarify positions and explore settlement options.
    • The mediator does not decide who is right or wrong; instead, the mediator guides parties toward a possible compromise.

  4. Duration and Extensions

    • The Supreme Court rules typically provide a specified period (e.g., 30 days to 60 days) within which mediation should be completed, subject to extension for valid reasons.
    • If mediation is successful, the resulting settlement agreement is immediately submitted to the court for approval.

  5. Return to Court

    • If mediation succeeds: The parties submit a Compromise Agreement. Once approved by the court, it becomes part of the judgment and is binding and enforceable.
    • If mediation fails: The mediator issues a certificate of non-settlement, and the case reverts to the regular court process (trial on the merits, or next stage of proceedings).

V. CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVILEGE

  1. Confidentiality Rule

    • All statements, admissions, or disclosures during CAM are confidential and cannot be used against any party if the mediation fails.
    • Neither the mediator nor the parties may divulge these communications to the court or to any third party, except in limited situations (e.g., written waiver of all parties, imminent threat of harm).

  2. Mediator as Witness

    • The mediator cannot be compelled to testify on any matters discussed during the mediation conferences.
    • This is essential in preserving the trust of the parties in the neutrality and confidentiality of the mediation process.

VI. ACCREDITED MEDIATORS: QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES

  1. Accreditation Requirements

    • Mediators must undergo the prescribed training under PHILJA or any Supreme Court-accredited ADR provider.
    • They must fulfill continuing education requirements to maintain their accreditation.

  2. Neutrality and Impartiality

    • Mediators have a duty to remain neutral, with no interest in the dispute’s outcome. They must disclose any conflict of interest or potential bias at the outset.

  3. Facilitative Role

    • Mediators use various techniques to clarify issues, manage conflict, and encourage creative problem-solving. They do not impose their own solutions or act as judges.

  4. Ethical Responsibilities

    • Maintain confidentiality.
    • Avoid any professional or personal relationships that might affect impartiality.
    • Adhere to the Supreme Court’s and PHILJA’s Code of Ethical Standards for Mediators.

VII. EFFECT OF MEDIATION SETTLEMENT

  1. Compromise Agreement

    • If parties reach a settlement, they execute a compromise agreement.
    • The compromise must be valid and enforceable under Philippine law (i.e., it must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy).

  2. Judicial Approval

    • The compromise agreement is submitted to the referring court for approval.
    • Once approved, it is entered as a judgment on compromise, which is immediately final and executory.

  3. Enforcement

    • A judgment based on a compromise agreement may be enforced through writs of execution as in ordinary judgments.
    • Failure or refusal to comply may lead to contempt proceedings or other enforcement measures.

VIII. COSTS, FEES, AND SANCTIONS

  1. Mediation Fees

    • The Supreme Court issues guidelines on the schedule of mediation fees, which are usually minimal relative to litigation expenses.
    • Parties typically share in the payment of these fees, unless they agree otherwise.

  2. Party Non-compliance

    • If a party unjustifiably refuses to attend CAM sessions, the mediator or the other party may refer the matter to the court for possible sanctions.
    • Courts may cite parties or counsel for contempt or impose fines for failure to comply with mediation orders.

IX. RELATIONSHIP TO JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION (JDR)

  1. Two Distinct Phases

    • Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM): Conducted by a PHILJA-accredited mediator, outside the judicial chambers, after the case is referred at pre-trial.
    • Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR): If CAM fails, some courts conduct JDR, where the judge actively mediates or conciliates the case. In JDR, the judge tries a facilitative or evaluative approach, but a different judge eventually handles the trial if settlement fails (to preserve impartiality).

  2. Complementary Approaches

    • CAM focuses on an external neutral mediator’s facilitative role.
    • JDR involves the judge as a settlement facilitator, typically after an initial mediation attempt has failed.

X. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR LAWYERS

  1. Duty to Encourage Amicable Settlement

    • Lawyers have an ethical duty under the Code of Professional Responsibility to promote settlement where possible and to avoid unnecessary litigation.
    • They should advise clients of the benefits of mediation and encourage good-faith participation.

  2. Client Empowerment

    • Counsel must explain the nature, purpose, and possible outcomes of mediation.
    • While lawyers may attend mediation sessions, they should avoid overshadowing the client’s voice.

  3. Honesty and Good Faith

    • Counsel must avoid dilatory tactics during mediation.
    • Misrepresentation or refusal to attend without valid cause may lead to disciplinary actions or sanctions from the court.

XI. BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES

  1. Benefits

    • Reduced Litigation Costs: Faster resolution saves time and expenses for parties and reduces court workload.
    • Preserves Relationships: Particularly beneficial in family, business, or community disputes.
    • Greater Flexibility in Outcomes: Parties can craft creative settlements beyond what a strict legal judgment might provide.

  2. Challenges

    • Reluctance to Compromise: Parties often approach mediation with hardened positions, requiring skillful facilitation.
    • Lack of Full Authority: If party representatives do not have authority to settle, mediation efforts may be futile.
    • Enforcement Hurdles: While compromise agreements are enforceable, post-settlement enforcement may still encounter resistance if a party does not voluntarily comply.

XII. BEST PRACTICES AND TIPS FOR EFFECTIVE CAM

  1. Early Preparation

    • Parties and counsel should identify key interests and potential creative solutions before the first mediation session.
    • Gather relevant documents and evidence needed to facilitate realistic settlement discussions.

  2. Active Participation and Good Faith

    • Both parties and lawyers should engage openly, respond to proposals, and remain flexible.
    • Avoid adversarial posturing and focus on shared interests or goals.

  3. Choose an Appropriate Mediator

    • Select a mediator with subject-matter knowledge, if the rules permit, especially in technical disputes (e.g., construction, commercial matters).
    • Respect the mediator’s role as a neutral facilitator.

  4. Document the Settlement Properly

    • Use clear, unambiguous language in the compromise agreement.
    • Ensure compliance with legal formalities (e.g., notarization, signatures, approvals).

CONCLUSION

Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) stands as a cornerstone of the Philippine Judiciary’s thrust to promote Alternative Dispute Resolution, ease judicial congestion, and foster amicable settlements. Guided by Supreme Court rules, CAM integrates a formal mediation process into pre-trial and other stages of litigation, ensuring that litigants first explore mutually beneficial compromises before resorting to full-blown trial.

When approached with genuine good faith, CAM provides an opportunity for cost-effective, expeditious, and tailor-made solutions to civil disputes. It empowers parties to shape their own outcomes while preserving confidentiality. Ultimately, the success of Court-Annexed Mediation relies on the commitment of all stakeholders—parties, counsel, judges, and mediators—to use the process as a meaningful, rather than perfunctory, path to dispute resolution.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login