Abstract
Citizens and companies involved in a legal dispute can go to court. A civil law procedure ends in a verdict or a settlement. If parties see possibilities for an amicable agreement, the judge suspends the hearing so that they and their lawyers can negotiate one in the corridor. That almost
... read more
always happens. In one out of three proceedings, the parties settle. We know from previous research which settlement interventions by judges help parties to settle amicably and which do not, but also that not every party is satisfied with achieved agreements. What actually happens in the corridor? That is what this study is all about. I observed 24 court cases in the courtroom and the hallways. Afterward, I interviewed litigants and their lawyers. That yielded relevant insights. First, there are remarkable differences in how (actively) lawyers and judges help parties settle. Often there is little negotiation in the corridor. People who go to a hearing do not expect a settlement. They are principled, often see their case as black and white, and hardly prepare settlement negotiations. Whenever the judge raises the possibility of settling the case, they don't know what to do with it. They do not tell what they need, and judges do not ask. Furthermore, settlement attempts sometimes miss the mark due to the idea that lawyers and judges have self-interests. All this regularly leads to litigants standing empty-handed in the corridor. Continued litigation is inevitable. In short, this study answers what actually happens in the corridors of the courthouses during suspensions of civil court hearings: sometimes very little, but at the same time always an awful lot. The process of finding solutions to litigants’ problems is an extraordinarily complex and multidisciplinary one, and I greatly respect lawyers and judges for taking it on. Conflict resolution is not assembly-line work, but custom work. There is no single settlement intervention that always works. What is effective varies from case to case and from party to party. This, however, does not change the fact that we now know what generally works. Settling is custom work done by people, with all the problematic human and legal interactions that entails. I hope that this research will lead to more focus on the human aspect – how litigants, lawyers, and judges behave, interact, and communicate, as well as their morality. I hope that it will remind us that lawsuits are ultimately about people. People who are not able to solve their problems independently and who seek help from legal representatives and the judiciary. People who are not looking for a settlement factory or a charade in the courthouse corridor, but are simply seeking a solution to their legal problems.
show less
