News

Dr Róisín O’Shea

Chair of the IPMO 22nd May 2026

Justice Twomey has issued a ground-breaking judgment this week (May 20th 2026); in J Burke & Associates Limited v Patrick O’Connell [2026] IEHC 314 he sets out the reasons why the courts do have the power to order litigants to mediate their dispute.

Up until this week’s High Court case the law in Ireland was unclear as to whether mandatory mediation (court ordered mediation) was possible beyond the limited scope of s. 15 of the Civil & Liability and Courts Act 2004. In 2013 the Supreme Court stated that:

                  "…there may be cases where [a mediation] process should be mandatory" [1]

However, in 2015 Justice Gilligan in Atlantic Shellfish in the High Court took a different view, stating that:

                  “…[n]o party should be forced to attend mediation" [2]

S. 16 of the Mediation Act 2017 provides that a Court has the power to ‘invite’ the parties to mediate, however, the motion before Justice Twomey was one asking the Court not just to ‘invite’ but also to ‘direct’ (order) mediation.

In considering the question, Justice Twomey noted that since the previous judgments were delivered in 2013 and 2015 that “there have been extensive changes in the law and practice of mediation in Ireland”, and referenced the significant development in England & Wales where the Court of Appeal in Churchill [3] held that a court, in controlling its own process, has the jurisdiction to engage in mediation. 

The case before the Court involved a contract dispute, the non-payment of fees allegedly owed by a farmer to an engineer (Burke) that had resulted in 10 years of litigation. The engineer claiming that € 252,004 in fees were owing. Counsel for Burke outlined to the Court that as the case was now ready to be set down for trial, both litigants were at the point of incurring significant brief fees with their respective counsel; and that in the client’s best interests the Court was being asked to direct mediation to reduce legal costs. The Court noted that Burke’s solicitor in pressing the reason for the application gave evidence that the legal fees may overshadow any award of the Court.

It has long been accepted that mandating mediation does not compel settlement, and where the Court directs the parties to mediation, it does not have the power to order them to reach agreement. The Mediation Act 2017 provides a further safeguard, to protect self-determination, providing that the parties are free to withdraw from mediation at any time. Justice Twomey reflected the view of the Hon Mr Justice Thomas T. Lewis, Los Angeles Superior Courts, who in 2010 presented at the International Family Law Conference at Maynooth on the benefits of requiring the parties to come together in mediation (mandating mediation), such a requirement often resulting in a settlement obviating the need for contested litigation.

Justice Twomey also noted the following:

1. Court-ordered mediation could be a better use of Court time

2. That court-ordered mediation does not, per se, breach a litigant’s constitutional right of access to the courts.

3. That mediation can lead to a narrowing of issues in dispute
4. That mandatory mediation is not a breach of right to a fair trial under Art. 6 of the ECHR
5. That one of the most compelling reasons why a court does have the power to order parties to mediate is because the role of the courts is to try and make the system better for litigants.
6. That the prohibitive costs of litigation is a factor in favour of mandatory mediation
7. That in relation to bullying and harassment cases that mediation is effectively, now mandatory
8. That “litigation is a lot like war, in the sense that, litigation is easy (and relatively cheap) for one person to start…however…litigation is not so easy and it can be expensive to end.”
9. That a court has the jurisdiction to regulate its own process, by exercising its discretion to order litigants to mediate their dispute.

Restating his view set out in V Media[4], Justice Twomey noted:

“Mediation is now front and centre of practically all civil disputes in Ireland, as a result of s. 14 of the Mediation Act 2017…it is clear that the Oireachtas wants mediation, rather than litigation, to be the first port of call for civil disputes, save for good reason.”

In conclusion Justice Twomey stated that “the courts have the power to order litigants to mediate their dispute”, that a court in controlling its own process, has an inherent jurisdiction to order parties to mediate in appropriate cases. In the case before the court, Justice Twomey indicated that he would order the parties to mediate, should it become necessary to make such an order. The law has now changed until challenged in a higher court, and the door is firmly open for court-ordered mediation.

J Burke & Associates Limited v Patrick O’Connell [2026] IEHC 314

https://www2.courts.ie/viewer/pdf/9f787d53-f593-45ef-bd08-095f81dadd3a/2026_IEHC_314.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

^[1] Fitzpatrick v Board of Management of St Mary’s Touraneena National School & Anor [2013] IESC 62 at para.10, per MacMenamin

^[2] Atlantic Shellfish Ltd. V Cork County Council [2015] IEHC 570 at para. 18, per Gilligan J.

^[3] Churchhill v Merthyr Tydfil CBC [2023] EWCA Civ 1416

^[4] V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited [2025] IEHC 430

We were honoured to have  internationally-renowned mediator Ken Cloke as our guest in March as part of our ‘In Conversation With’ series available on the IPMO YouTube channel

Ken is one of the world’s foremost experts on mediation with over 4 decades of experience in conflict resolution.

Ken began his academic journey at the University of California, Berkeley where he became deeply involved in the Civil Rights Movement. He worked as an administrative law judge for the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board and a judge Pro Tem for the Superior Court of Los Angeles. He has a Juris Doctorate, a PhD in history and an LLM and has gone on to lecture in several law schools including Harvard and Pepperdine University. In the 80s, his career shifted to mediation, he set up the centre for dispute resolution in Santa Monica, California, and over the last 4 decades has established himself as a leader in the field of conflict resolution, mediating thousands of disputes and authoring numerous influential books on the subject, including: Mediating Dangerously (2001), The Crossroads of Conflict (2006) The Dance of Opposites (2013), His most recent major work, described as his "magnum opus," is The Magic in Mediation: A Search for Symmetries, Metaphors and Scale-Free Practices (2023). 

In 2006, he co-founded Mediators Beyond Borders International (MBBI) and served as its first president, aiming to build local skills for peace and address systemic conflicts worldwide.

Leading the conversation with Ken was Shane Dempsey, Partner in Arc Mediation and Deputy Chair of the IPMO, with 15 years of experience as a mediator and many hundreds of cases completed to date. Ken and Shane talked about the “magic in mediation” , the scalability of “higher order skills”, omni-partiality, AI, and delved into a shared interest in physics, mathematics, and the natural world.

The conversation is available on our YouTube channel as of May 2026

A truly fascinating and engaging conversation about meaning, metaphor & mediation. 

Dr Roisin O’Shea, Chair of the Irish Professional Mediators’ Organisation speaking to Radio Kerry Presenter Deirdre Walsh on ‘TalkAbout’ on April 29th 2026. Deirdre asked the question “is there another way” when speaking about resolving disputes that might be related to work, a row over a will or the break-down of a marriage. Deirdre in acknowledging that going to Court is expensive, stressful and can take a long time, noted that, “increasingly in Ireland more and more people are turning towards mediation, and the benefits of mediation as the first port of call in dealing with dispute resolution including separations or divorce ”.

Dr O’Shea outlines why the Court system and the law is not designed to resolve disputes holistically, all disputes being fundamentally about human beings, and outcomes in court are limited and often binary; mediation can deal with not only the factual basis of the dispute but the emotional dynamics behind it.

In closing the interview Dr O’Shea said, “we (IPMO) are driving up the standards of mediation, we want the public to feel really confident that when they pick an IPMO mediator they are getting somebody who operates to a standard “.

The podcast is available here 

Why Mediation is now the first option

Opening address by Chair Dr Róisín O’Shea IPMO Conference April 16th 2026 at the Dublin Dispute Resolution Centre

The IPMO is but a toddler, 4 ½ years old, born in a post covid landscape, where on-line services became normative and the mediation sector had to quickly innovate and embrace new technologies; Our organisation wants to ensure that the profession evolves to meet the needs of the public, while improving competency through a framework of Apprenticeship, Supervision and Mentorship.

We are once again in a time of global disruption. Every day it seems there is something new to worry about; whether it is the break-down of international law, or disruption to fuel supplies, or AI changing forever the way we work, or another story in the media of man’s inhumanity to man. In speaking of the fading of the rules based international order in his address at Davos in January this year, Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada spoke of the beginning of a harsh reality in the world order, “…we are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition”

Conflict is human, but we are not powerless in the face of it. We have the capacity to find a new way forward, to adapt and transition out of the stressful space we stand in, on to a new path with solutions that are workable and fair. This is where mediators can help us.

In Ireland we boldly stepped into the new frontier of 21st Century dispute resolution with the enactment of the Mediation Act 2017, leading the way on the world stage with a statutory framework for the service of mediation. This progressive Act promotes the early use of mediation to resolve all civil disputes, and even where litigation has already started the Act enables the parties to step away from the Courts to try mediation, right up until a final determination is made by a Judge. Crucially we have the statutory basis for confidentiality and enforceability of mediation settlements. It was an absolute pleasure to co-author a paper on the enforcement of mediation settlements with Michael Peart, Former Court of Appeal Judge and barrister Stephen O’Herlihy, which is in the current issue of the Irish Journal of Family Law - addressing a misconception that mediated agreements cannot be legally binding – which is not the case.

Judges have long advocated for the use of mediation – however, it is the higher courts that have the power to truly bring about change, and we are honoured to have the Hon Mr Justice David Barniville, President of the High Court as our conference keynote speaker (See Irish Times article about his keynote speech) and the Hon Ms Justice Nuala Jackson as a panellist.

The Honourable Justice David Barniville, President of the High Court

The tipping point and inspiration for this conference came in the July 2025 High Court case of V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited [2025] IEHC 430 where Justice Michael Twomey, said that the aim of the Oireachtas under section 14 of the Mediation Act 2017, is “

…to ensure that litigation is the last resort, rather than a first resort, in order to save prospective litigants tens/hundreds of thousands of euros in legal costs and the many years of lost time and effort.”

This case sets an important benchmark for any Court hearing any civil dispute, (including separations or divorce), that a hearing should only commence where the Judge is satisfied the plaintiffs have been comprehensively advised on mediating rather than litigating their dispute. The Judge noted the importance the Act places on plaintiffs being advised on the benefits of mediation, “…before the client ends up on what might be termed the merry-go-round of litigation – one that is all too easy to get on, but can be difficult to get off.”

Dr Roisin O'Shea, IPMO Chair

What we need now is for assistance from Government to get us over the final hurdle to establish the Mediation Council of Ireland  –  we, the stakeholders of the Mediation Council Shadow group are ready and we have unanimously agreed that we should adopt the European Code of Conduct for mediators as the national code of conduct, to be approved by the Minister under section 9 – all that is needed now is sufficient funding, which we have estimated as circa € 500,000 per year (a full cost model with 4 staff and some level of function delegation) to operate the Council so that it can begin its work of promoting public awareness and providing information on the availability and operation of mediation in the State.

All of us in this room know that mediation can resolve the majority of civil disputes faster, at less cost, confidentially, and often the agreement can be more creative than the Courts can order. 

Dr I. Stephanie Boyce CBE 

I also want to acknowledge two extraordinary women who have inspired and empowered me over the last two decades to take the path of advocacy and research to drive on the awareness and uptake of mediation; the Hon Ms Justice Sara Phelan and the Hon. Ms Justice Nuala Jackson. I am also delighted to see some special guests here today, long-time advocates of mediation; Michael O’Connor SC representing the ADR Committee of the Bar of Ireland and Keith Kelliher representing the Chartered Institute of arbitrators. It is important to recognise the work that Keith and also Liam Guidera representing the Law Society of Ireland have done over the years to advance the discussions to establish the Mediation Council of Ireland. We three have been at the table since the very first stakeholder meeting in late 2018.

The Mediation Act 2018 has been in place for eight years. I believe we are all finally ready for this cultural shift, where mediation becomes the very first resort in dispute resolution.

 

Dr Róisín O’Shea, Chair of the Irish Professional Mediators’ Organisation and member of the Child Maintenance Group 2020-2022, welcomes the launch of the Child Maintenance Guidelines by Minister Jim O’Callaghan today at the Family Justice Development Forum hosted by the Minister in Dublin; a recommendation of the Child Maintenance Group.

Attending at the Forum, Dr O’Shea congratulated the Minister and his Department on launching the much needed child maintenance guidelines;

 “Our courts currently operate without any system of guidelines in the determination of child maintenance, dealing with each matter on a case by case basis. It would be of significant assistance to parents and the courts to have a clear indication of the amount of child maintenance payable. The case is well made internationally in terms of diverting people away from the courts to agree on their own family based arrangement with the assistance of mediators, without State intervention, or where private agreements cannot be reached child maintenance guidelines can be administered by the courts which will bring consistency of outcome and certainty to those who need child maintenance and those who pay child maintenance.

In 2019 my colleague Shane Dempsey (IPMO Treasurer) and I were invited to meet with then Minister Regina Doherty to discuss a submission we made on establishing child maintenance guidelines in Ireland, providing an analysis of the operation of such guidelines in Canada. The Minister subsequently appointed me to the Child Maintenance Group 2020-2022 chaired by Judge Catherine Murphy, and in the final Report from that Group a majority recommended that a formula to calculate child maintenance be developed."

In launching the Child Maintenance Guidelines today the Minister is also furthering a recommendation of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice & Equality 2019; that parties should be advised that from the outset that they would try and reach their own agreement and not persist with the adversarial process to avoid exposure to stress, cost, lost time and risk. The Minister emphasised the importance of promoting the use of mediation and noted that this is a guiding principle of the Family Courts Act 2024.

Without maintenance guidelines the outcome in Court is uncertain and therefore may be worth pursuing where a litigant believes a Court would order more or a litigant believes the Court would order less. With child maintenance guidelines we are likely to follow the significant progress made in Northern Ireland where the operation of a child support maintenance framework, including a calculator, has deterred litigation, such that child maintenance is rarely litigated.

Dr O'Shea added: 

"With the assistance of mediators, parents can now use the Child Maintenance Guidelines released today and the soon to be released On-line Child Maintenance Calculator to reach private agreement. This is a game changer for families in Ireland and the members of the IPMO look forward to assisting families to quickly reach financial arrangements in relation to their children.”

Photo Left to Right: Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Jim O’Callaghan T.D and Dr Róisín O’Shea Chair of the IPMO

Our first event yesterday (Dec 10th), sponsored by PTSB at their Dublin Head office, and co-ordinated by Sustainable HRM Skillnet, was a great success. We had a full house to hear from our panel of experts on Workplace Mediation: early intervention where informal steps do not resolve the dispute; how to appoint a mediator; what to expect of mediation and how the Mediation Act 2017 applies.

Fredericka Sheppard - Voltedge Consulting & IPMO Board Member

Fredericka Sheppard, an industry expert and Chair of the IPMO Workplace Committee, kicked off the event with an over-view of workplace mediation and key points for HR to consider. The panel discussion was moderated by Ercus Stewart SC Member of the Inner Bar and Board member of the IPMO with input from Dr Róisín O’Shea Chair of the IPMO, and experienced workplace mediator, Ronan Murray Senior Employee Relations & Industrial Relations Manager PTSB, and Karen Killalea Partner and Head of Employment Maples Group Ireland.

Thanks to Sara Mullally, Sustainable HRM Skillnet for making this happen and to PTSB for hosting the event. Also in attendance were IPMO Board members Shane Dempsey (Deputy Chair), Bill Holohan SC and Lisa Lingwood.

The IPMO have developed a practical guide for HR on the use of mediation for workplace disputes which will be provided to all attendees. We are looking forward to organising more events for HR in 2026 where there will be a further opportunity to hear from experts in the field.

IPMO Board members with (far left) Ronan Murray - Head of Employee Relations, PTSB - and (far right) Karen Killalea - Partner, Maples Group. 

by Dr Róisín O’Shea, Chair of the IPMO

For the first time the High Court has provided a detailed analysis of the benefits of mediation and the intentions of the Oireachtas to promote mediation as the first forum for dispute resolution. The Court has laid bare the merry-go-round and prohibitive costs for litigants in the High Court, and the financial incentive for the recipients of those fees - the lawyers.

In the July 2025 case of V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited [2025] IEHC 430 Justice Michael Twomey, said that the aim of the Oireachtas under section 14 of the Mediation Act 2017, is “…to ensure that litigation is the last resort, rather than a first resort, in order to save prospective litigants tens/hundreds of thousands of euros in legal costs and the many years of lost time and effort.”

Justice Twomey examined a solicitors obligations set out in section 14 of the 2017 Act. A solicitor must provide advice to their client about using mediation to try and resolve the dispute; must provide their client with information about mediation services, including providing the names and addresses of mediators; and must set out the advantages of resolving the dispute through mediation rather than litigating the matter. In his judgment Justice Twomey then outlined that evidence must then be provided to the Court that this has happened, which is done by way of a statutory declaration (Mediation Declaration) completed by the solicitor which must accompany the proceedings when filed. The judge noted that the obligations on a solicitor set out in section 14 are not a “box ticking exercise” for the Court or for solicitors.

If a solicitor has not done this, i.e. submitted the Mediation Declaration, then the Court must refuse to hear the case and is obliged to adjourn proceedings to enable advice on mediation to be provided as the law requires.

Justice Twomey noted that the aim of the Oireachtas, under section 14, is to ensure that litigation is the last resort, not the first step in trying to resolve a dispute; he noted the clear desire of the Oireachtas to save parties huge amounts of time and huge sums in legal costs and noted the considerable public interest in saving court time. He also emphasized the duty placed on all courts by section 14 of the Act to ensure that a plaintiff has received advice about using mediation: “This therefore puts an onus on all courts, to ensure that a plaintiff has been comprehensively advised to consider mediation instead of litigating, before hearing a case”.

This case sets an important benchmark for any Court hearing any civil dispute, which would include separations or divorce; that a hearing should only commence where the Judge is satisfied that the plaintiffs have been comprehensively advised on mediating rather than litigating their dispute. The Judge noted the importance the Act places on plaintiffs being advised on the benefits of mediation, “…before the client ends up on what might be termed the merry-go-round of litigation – one that is all too easy to get on, but can be difficult to get off.”

In referring to the benefits of using mediation, Justice Twomey noted that those benefits must include the “very considerable financial benefits of mediating, rather than litigating…”.  The judge noted that the costs of a successful mediation were likely to be a fraction of the legal fees generated and likely to take a matter of weeks rather than in the region of 4 years to litigate. Interestingly, the Judge contrasted the prohibitive cost of legal fees for litigants in the High Court versus the financial incentive for the recipient of those fees – the lawyers.

In this case the proceedings had been issued without the accompanying Mediation Declaration, in direct contravention of the law. The judge held that an attempt by the solicitor to remedy the breach by providing a sworn Mediation Declaration later that same day, could not retrospectively remedy the breach of the 2017 Act.

The importance of this judgment cannot be understated for the development of mediation in Ireland. Justice Twomey has provided absolute clarity on not only the intentions of the Oireachtas to ensure that mediation is the first dispute resolution option for civil disputes but also outlined the benefits of mediation versus the reality of litigation:

1.        Mediation offers a crucial opportunity for ‘reality checking’ of a plaintiff’s claim; an independent assessment by an objective mediator, before a court gets to do so.

2.        A successful mediation will take a matter of weeks, whereas litigating may take years.

3.        The costs of mediation are likely to be a fraction of litigation costs.

4.        Once a plaintiff gets on the merry-go-round of litigation it is difficult to get off.

5.        The legal costs for litigants in the High Court are prohibitive – but are an incentive for the lawyers who get those fees.

In the case of  V Media Doo & Anor v Techads Media Limited, the plaintiff’s claim was for circa $2.5 million and the Defendant’s counter-claim was for circa $1.8 million, listed for an 8 day hearing, with costs estimated as likely to exceed €1 million. The Judge stated that this therefore was a case that would have benefited from mediation and “reality checking”, noting that the Court ultimately found that neither the plaintiff nor the Defendant were entitled to any award, and as a result the only winners in this case were the lawyers.

Read the full judgment here:

https://ww2.courts.ie/view/Judgments/67a63cbc-dc93-466a-8c8f-88834c5f5bd4/c0e565e5-5c18-4afd-a41f-c9be0a419a9f/2025_IEHC_430.pdf/pdf

More and more people are using mediation to resolve all kinds of civil disputes and our annual conference focused on the connection between mediation and the courts as provided in the Mediation Act 2017.

Speaking at the  IPMO Conference  on Mediation and the Civil Justice system today (10^th April 2025), Dr Róisín O’Shea, Chair of the IPMO, spoke of the significant shift in Ireland to use mediation as a means of resolving most civil disputes, supported by Government policy and the legal framework of the Mediation Act 2017.

She said that more and more people are using mediation to resolve all kinds of civil disputes including divorce, parenting disputes, a falling out between business partners or directors, a contract dispute, a workplace dispute, disputes over a will, personal injury or medical negligence claims. 

Dr O’Shea said that the passing of the Mediation Act 2017 represented an important turning point for the Irish civil justice system, supporting the development of a modern mediation practice. “Mediation takes place in the context of a civil justice system, and this conference seeks to examine the interactions between these two systems, their points of intersection, the responsibilities of the dispute resolution professionals and their disparate interests and concerns.”

Also speaking at the conference the newly appointed High Court judge, the Hon. Ms Justice Sara Phelan, who over the years has been a passionate advocate of mediation summed up the power of mediation and the benefits of close cooperation between mediators and lawyers to assist disputing parties.

“The magic of mediation is that by allowing parties take ownership of their dispute and come up with solutions that best suit them, it brings a finality to disputes, preserves relationships, and allows parties move on with their lives in a way that is not always possible with litigation.  But mediation and litigation are not mutually exclusive and by mediators and lawyers understanding that theirs is a symbiotic relationship, the disputing parties benefit, and optimum dispute resolution is the outcome.” she said.

Ms. Justice Sara Phelan, speaking to IPMO conference attendees

Another speaker, Michael Peart, former Court of Appeal judge and now mediator posed the question, “Can mediation settlements be legally binding”?,  Absolutely he said. He went on to clarify that a mediation settlement is legally binding where the parties decide it is to be enforceable between them in accordance with section 11 (1)(b) of the Mediation Act 2017 and the formalities of contract law have been complied with, including having the benefit of legal advice.

 

Other speakers at the IPMO Conference were:

•  Dr Yaser Alashqar, Independent College, bringing his significant experience in the field as an academic;
• Suzanne Walsh BL highlighting the support for mediation in the new Family Courts Act 2024; Dr Gerry McMahon, a former WRC adjudicator, brings 35 years of practical experience in Human Resources.
• UK guest speaker Geoffrey Milton brings his insight from both sides of the table in workplace disputes, and from his work on the workplace mediation working group of the Civil Mediation Council England and Wales;
• Aoife Farrelly BL, ADR Committee Bar of Ireland 
• Brian McMullin, ADR Committee Law Society of Ireland bring the perspective of the legal profession.
• Shane Dempsey, Treasurer of the IPMO, and former IT researcher spoke about the use of AI in Mediation

 Panellists: (l-r; Suzanne Walsh BL, former-Justice Michael Peart, Ms. Justice Sara Phelan, Dr Roisin O'Shea, Brian McMullin, Dr Yaser Alashqar)

Dr O’Shea said; “We were honoured to have such an incredible line-up of speakers and panelists helping us to explore the challenges ahead as we continue to develop modern mediation practice, working with other professionals including lawyers, accountants, tax advisers and other experts, to ensure that parties in dispute have the best support possible.

Conflict is inevitable, but no-one wants to remain in conflict. We want solutions as quickly and cost-effectively as possible, and mediation is the answer. It is a practical, accessible, cost-effective and human-centred alternative to going to Court." 

She also spoke about the speed at which mediation can be accessed and the benefits:

“You can start mediation right now, even if litigation has already started.  The IPMO has mediators across the country ready and willing to assist www.theipmo.ie They provide the certainty of a legally binding agreement if that is what you need. We know that mediation works as the over-whelming majority of disputes reach an agreement, and that agreement can be legally binding. If litigation has already started your mediated agreement can be brought to Court to be turned into Court orders, or where you want a divorce your mediated agreement can be the basis for the court orders for the decree of divorce.”

IPMO Board & Justice Sara Phelan (l-r; Shane Dempsey, Ercus Stewart SC, Dr Roisin O'Shea, Ms. Justice Sara Phelan, Fredericka Sheppard, Gareth Leech, Brian Sheridan)

Celebrating International Mediation Awareness Week 2024 with students at UCC School of Law

Mary Aldridge Connors Chair of the IPMO Community Mediation Committee led out on a presentation on mediation to students at UCC School of Law, celebrating International Mediation Awareness Week on  along with committee member Catriona Redmond; assisted by Lisa Lingwood and IPMO Board members Bill Holohan SC and Dr Róisín O’Shea, Chair of the IPMO

Chair of the IPMO attends CIarb Ireland branch Annual Dinner 2024

Dr Róisín O’Shea, Chair of the Irish Professional Mediators’ Organisation attended the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Ireland branch) Annual Dinner as a guest of CIarb Chair Dermot Durack.  Dr O’Shea commented, “it was a fantastic opportunity to hear views on the broad church of ADR. Proponents of Arb-Med v Med Arb, models of mediation, arbitration and the curious custom and practice world of conciliation. We are looking forward to working together as two organisations with ADR front and centre to resolve disputes”.