ESTRELLA, Tom Lui M.

JD4201
JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION
My group and I attended a scheduled mediation observation last April 12, 2018. We were asked
to convene in a small room with a judge, or a mediator for this instance, waiting for both parties of
various cases to come in. We managed to witness two civil cases which were presented before the
mediator in hopes for such cases to be settled without trial.

The judicial dispute resolution or the court annexed mediation proceedings has a goal of putting
an end to pending litigation through a compromise agreement of the parties and thereby help solve
the ever-pressing problem of court docket congestion. Such proceedings may prevent the parties to
undergo a full blown trial, which would be very exhaustive and costly, as well. This doesn’t just apply
in civil cases, but on criminal cases as well.

The first case that we observed is a collection case, where the respondents have a huge amount
of debt to a bank. The couple, or the respondents, told their side of the story, the experiences they
had, expounding their case before the mediator and the petitioner bank. The mediator decided to
expunge the damages on the part of the respondents and decided that they make a down payment to
cover the half of the required amount to be paid and set a deadline for such to be paid in full, and both
of the parties agreed to it.

The second case is another collection case between two corporations. The petitioner assails that
the respondent corporation made business with them, bought some assets from them, but they
haven’t paid in full. The respondent corporation alleges that they actually paid with excess to the
amount they need to pay, and asked the other corporation to refund the excess to them. The
respondents even showed a record of the tabulated amounts of such sale, but petitioner claim that
they have the records and the receipts which would say otherwise to the claims of respondents. With
that said, the case was not successfully mediated, and pushed for a full blown court trial.

The two civil cases are of different nature, but it showed what judicial dispute resolution can do
to make the lives of the parties easier and to be able to settle immediately, preventing a trial to take
place. The mediator discussed to us her work as the head of mediation unit in Makati, upon serving
many years as an RTC judge and CA judge, and today as chief mediator. She also discussed Republic
Act No. 9285 or the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004, which sets the guidelines on how a
mediation proceedings is to be conducted, what are the things needed to take on undergoing such
proceedings and other forms of arbitration that such judges or mediators can do.

My take on this process is that, it takes away all the exhaustive procedural aspect of civil
procedure and aims to skip all that, settle or compromise, and both parties be able to have a mutual
understanding in resolving their case. I must say that this is a very logical steps for parties to undergo,
and save themselves from all the trouble of a civil case trial.