Projects
The reform of ISDS – dispute prevention and alternative dispute resolution of investment disputes KU Leuven
The research project aims at analyzing the current state of dispute prevention and alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) in the context of international investment disputes. The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (“ISDS”) system has been recently vastly criticised. The growing number of cases and the growing discontent among the States prompted discussions about the reform of this dispute settlement system. One of the aspects of ISDS reform ...
The writing of chapter 6: "Alternative dispute resolution" of the theme book Justice Hasselt University
Alternative dispute resolution and article 6 ECHR. Right of access to an independent and impartial judge in Belgium from a comparative and human rights perspective. KU Leuven
Article 6.1 ECHR guarantees the right of access to an independent and impartial judge. The central research question is to what extent mechanisms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are compatible with this right.
For the purpose of this research, ADR is defined as all dispute resolution processes conducted by a neutral third party, in which the third party cannot impose a final decision on the parties (thus excluding arbitration). ...
Mass dispute resolution in Europe: a study on private enforcement, public enforcement and A(O)DR KU Leuven
Key factors in mediation as conflict resolution KU Leuven
Despite the rising popularity and use of mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution, the evidence base with regards to mediation process research shows a surprising lack of studies using research methods that allow for detection of causal associations. Additionally, mediation research up until now has adopted the aim of studying “what works”, but has largely neglected the more nuanced question of “what works when”. To address these ...
Towards smoother mediation in labor disputes by strengthening referrals VIVES
Comparative Legal Thinking KU Leuven
A vast literature spanning multiple disciplines posits the existence of deep-seated cultural disparities in the way jurists approach and think about legal questions. Common law legal reasoning is typically portrayed as more as flexible, policy-oriented and pragmatic than its civil law counterpart, which is viewed as regimented by codification and rigid, formalistic modes of thinking. These differences, in turn, are supposed to influence a ...