## **Mediation Scenario: Neighbour Property Dispute**

**Background:**
Two neighbours, Mr. Rakesh and Ms. Suvangi, have been in a heated dispute over a boundary fence.
Mr. Rakesh claims that the fence encroaches on his property, while Ms. Suvangi insists that it is well
within her boundary. The tension has escalated, and both parties are unwilling to compromise.
### **My Role as the Mediator:**
1. **Setting the Ground Rules:**
- I begin by explaining the mediation process to both parties, emphasizing the importance of
neutrality.
- I assure them that my role is not to take sides but to facilitate open communication.
2. **Listening Actively:**
- I allow each neighbour to express their grievances without interruption.
- Mr. Rakesh describes how the fence obstructs his view and affects his property value.
- Ms. Suvangi explains that the fence was erected by the previous owner and has been in place for
years.
3. **Identifying Common Interests:**
- I focus on shared interests rather than positions.
- Both parties express a desire for a peaceful neighbourhood and maintaining good relations.
4. **Exploring Options:**
- I propose various solutions, such as adjusting the fence or conducting a survey to determine the
exact boundary.
- I encourage brainstorming and creative problem-solving.
5. **Remaining Neutral:**
- When emotions escalate, I remain calm and impartial.
- I avoid taking sides or expressing personal opinions.
- If either party becomes confrontational, I steer the conversation back to constructive dialogue.
6. **Highlighting Consequences:**
- I discuss the potential consequences of continued conflict.
- Legal fees, strained relationships, and stress are emphasized.
7. **Agreement and Resolution:**
- After several sessions, Mr. Rakesh and Ms. Suvangi agree to hire a professional surveyor.
- The survey confirms that the fence encroaches slightly onto Mr. Rakesh's property.
- They decide to adjust the fence and split the cost.
### **Impact of Neutrality:**
- By remaining neutral, I ensured that both parties felt heard and respected.
- My impartiality allowed for open communication and creative problem-solving.
- The resolution was fair, and both neighbours left the mediation satisfied.
In cases where a mediator fails to remain neutral, the disputants may lose trust in the process. They
might perceive bias and become less willing to cooperate, leading to prolonged conflict and potential
legal battles. Neutrality is the cornerstone of effective mediation, fostering an environment where
parties can find common ground and reach mutually acceptable solutions.
When a mediator fails to remain neutral during a mediation process, it can have significant negative
impacts on the disputants and the overall resolution:
1. **Loss of Trust:**
- Neutrality is the cornerstone of effective mediation. When a mediator takes sides or shows bias,
both parties may lose trust in the process.
- Disputants may perceive the mediator as favouring one side, leading to scepticism about the
fairness of the proceedings.
2. **Increased Hostility:**
- A biased mediator can inadvertently escalate tensions. Parties may become more entrenched in
their positions, believing that the mediator is not genuinely seeking a balanced solution.
- Hostility between disputants can intensify, hindering productive communication.
3. **Reduced Cooperation:**
- Disputants are less likely to cooperate if they feel the mediator is biased. They may withhold
information or refuse to engage in meaningful dialogue.
- Cooperation is essential for finding mutually acceptable solutions.
4. **Ineffective Problem-Solving:**
- A neutral mediator encourages creative problem-solving. Without neutrality, parties may focus on
winning rather than resolving the underlying issues.
- The mediation process becomes less effective in reaching satisfactory outcomes.
5. **Longer Resolution Time:**
- Biased mediation can lead to prolonged disputes. Parties may seek legal avenues instead, further
delaying resolution.
- Lengthy conflicts have emotional, financial, and social costs.
6. **Legal Implications:**
- If a mediator's bias is evident, disputants may challenge the mediation outcome in court.
- Legal battles can be costly and strain relationships further.
7. **Negative Emotional Impact:**
- Disputants may feel frustrated, unheard, or unfairly treated by a biased mediator.
- Emotional distress can affect their well-being and willingness to engage in future mediation.
In summary, a mediator's neutrality is essential for fostering open communication, trust, and
constructive problem-solving. When neutrality is compromised, the entire mediation process suffers,
impacting both disputants and the likelihood of a successful resolution.