Manchester in the rain - for the provision of two seminar days in November 2007, at the invitation of Medialex. The second day was for experienced producers and produced a wide range of worries and misnomers in the opening "surgery" session. Without giving anything away, it was a chance to deal in specifics before putting those concerns back into a full legal structure for the second part of the course. It is a format we like and sets the level according to the contributors' comfort. East East [ award winning Punjabi restaurant] was a happy discovery on the short walk form the BBC to the hotel.

We have done several on-line, interactive seminars over the last year and are still assessing where they are useful/viable. At present we think they work well as updates and follow-ons from courses, but will be doing a couple of free trials later in 2008. You need a PC and preferably a WebCam [ don't worry, you won't end up on YouTube ] to participate. If interested have a look at the tech set up on : www.virtualacademyonline/demos
 
Edinburgh 25-27th August 2006 was interesting, in that we saw some good shows and met some old friends. The restaurant "Rhubarb" won our Eating Award, with the generally available Deep-Fried-Haggis-for-£2 coming a close 2nd.

On 7th June 2006 we provided a short address to mark Pro Bono Week at the Law Society in Cambridge. This was prefaced by the comment that the lyrics "there are more questions than answers" come to mind whenever this subject is discussed. In mediation, the availability of volunteers is admirable, but the lack of any structure for accreditation and court scheme development leaves the provision of services a very mixed bag. Overall though, we were voting PB a "good thing" and suggesting that, though some motives for involvement were questionable [ e.g. putting troublesome partners quietly out to seed; indirect marketing; Guilty Conscience], a mixed motive was forgivable. Still, we hope most PB mediators [ and lawyers ] are in the potential Sainthood class. CVs to the Vatican, not us, please.

On the 19th May 2006, we attended the Conference on Sports Law held at Chelsea Football Club. The speakers were from Blackstone Chambers who provide a real focus of expertise - we heard from the players rather than the sports writers. In that context, the session on mediation was disappointing. It didn't provide more than an introduction to mediation generally - only the broadest brushstrokes on the benfits of confidentiality and flexible remedies. In a note-to-self, I reflected that role plays are effective as props in such talks, but are double-edged. It can veer from good interactive illustration to bad Am-dram very quickly. Some memories of personal performances trickled blushingly back....

National Film School 16th May 2006 Asked to provide a 3 hour course on copyright in the week the over-hyped Da Vinci Code was released, we issued the class with copies of the judgment in the plagiarism case over Dan Brown's book and assigned them roles - the claimants, Dan and his wife, the publisher, the Judge etc etc. This proved a good vehicle to explore the basic concepts and how you get into a mess with them in real life. It was only later I discovered that the Judge had put a code into the Judgment. Doh!

Cambridge Law Society 6th May 2006 CPD Course Provided this course for non-specialists on the main divisions of media law. The idea is to provide a key for lawyers whose clients drift into media issues.  It was also directed to younger lawyers interested in developing a media law practice.

Radio Suffolk contacted us in April 2006 [ and a couple of times since to do the same] to talk about the perennial Neighbours from Hades issue and an interview went out on the 20th. There are few new points to make, but we discussed the profiles that are typical in these cases [noise, boundaries, hedges] and year on year they are added to and defined more closely. Though it is dangerous to play amateur psychologist, you cannot help but notice that certain neighbour dynamics are common.

In March 2006, we contributed to a Mediation Week 2005 follow up held in Cambridge. Though we had been the Suffolk representative, Cambridge is the hub, in Court terms, for some of our County Courts. The turnout for " Mediation - the New Landscape" was good. The feedback suggested the content was OK, but there was some hostility in the responses. Thankfully, we have no way of knowing if we, or other speakers, were the target.

December 2005 saw us at the CEDR 2nd European Congress and on a panel about inequality of bargaining power. We looked [ maybe for a last time for now] at the television format game and highlighted some elements of a major report from the summer. The session was varied and played out the issues in settings as diverse as Insurance and Aboriginal Rights. Our only regret was adlibbing too much - which did not come out well in the transcripts published later. If being transcribed, read from a script is the advice.

The biggest pro bono effort of 2005 culminated in Mediation Awareness Week in October/ November 2005. It is evidence of either genuine enthusiasm or desperation that so many mediators donated time pro bono to what was, on one view, an underfunded government project. Our recorded time was nearly 2 working weeks. In brief, we found the local legal profession had limited interest or had had their appetite sated [ "We have had Mediation rammed down our throats" was a sample response]. The public had some interest in community mediation [ from local radio and press feedback]. When we set up at the Bury St. Edmunds as a free mediation unit, litigants in person [ in particular] seemed keen to take the opportunity when it was offered by the District Judges. Little could be read in to that, given the small numbers and the absense of cost, but it was small commercial disputes that came through and they settled in sessions limited to 2 hours. Judges have a quasi-mediation approach in such situations. At worst, the option could free up judicial time in the small claims/commercial category.

We went to the Rose d'Or in May 2005 where formats held centre stage in legal matters and an award was given for the first time by FRAPA. We discussed the new lawyers network being established to police rights across the globe. It will be interesting to see how the litigate/mediate axis reacts.

Television and Film Council Belfast 29th April 2005 "Contract Cutting - Producer PoV" was the label for this one day course. It was only on contract - using interactive negotiating exercises and written tests to try to persuade younger producers/directors  that informality is the enemy. Thought of this recently [ August 2006] when a very eminent director client said that he had been told by a prospective employer [ an indie of some vintage] that they "didn't do director contracts". Not a surprise, we see it all the time and we shall continue to preach the [written, signed and enforcable] word.

At the Cafe Royal London 29th April 2005 We contributed to a day conference on "Disclosure and Evidence" run by CLT. Our paper was on ADR [ more on this over on www.mediadr.biz]. It may be they did not like us, but having pencilled a session for the 2006 conference, it was dropped as an unwanted "novelty" topic. Not a good sign for those of us who feel ADR needs a higher profile.

In early March 2005, we went to an old Tea Factory in Shoreditch and developed the themes of mediation in Sport and Media with a broader audience, including lawyers from other legal disciplines. The reception was favourable in that no-one said the thesis was a nonsense. The venue was a triumph of Brit-Art chic and we hope to find an excuse to go back. Pretentious, Nous?

A mediation seminar was held on 23rd November 2004 in the boardroom of 22 Golden Square london W1. Though it was a Law Society CPD course, it was intended as an open free session and attracted a couple of dozen people from across the industries, but primarily television. It was pitched as an introduction and to "set out the stall", broadly being that mediation is no panacea, but it has not been fully thought through as an efficient way of resolving disputes. We should be looking at the parallels in Sport and Media and starting to see priority areas where "mediate before you litigate" is asensible presumption.