Frequently asked questions

The CMAP has been relying on a team of lawyers and advisers since its creation in 1995. It thus offers high quality services, within short deadlines and with support that combines confidentiality and efficiency.

The proceedings are supervised by our committees, which guarantee their professionalism and independence.

Alternative dispute resolution is an out-of-court process, as opposed to traditional dispute resolution, which involves bringing the dispute before a state judge.

No, either party can freely terminate the process at any time.

Mediation is fundamentally different from arbitration in that its purpose is to reach an amicable agreement between the parties, thanks to the intervention of a qualified third party whose role is limited to organizing the debates, leaving the parties free to form a mutually acceptable agreement on the merits, except in consumer mediation where the mediator can give an opinion. On the contrary, arbitration consists in settling the dispute by an award which, like a judgment, is binding on the parties.

Learn more about mediation and arbitration.

The conventional mediation process is initiated by the parties themselves and by a simple referral to CMAP. This referral may originate from a mediation clause or result from the initiative of one or both parties.

Judicial mediation is a measure ordered by the civil or commercial judge with the prior agreement of the parties. The CMAP has the vocation to be appointed by all the judicial authorities on the national territory.

The difference thus results in the conditions of implementation of the process, the course of the judicial and conventional mediation is then identical. Learn more about mediation.

In order to be effective in France, an arbitral award made abroad must be enforceable. The procedure allowing an arbitral award to be enforceable on French territory is called exequatur. In France, the court having jurisdiction to enforce an arbitral award is the Tribunal de Grande Instance in whose jurisdiction the award was made or the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris if the award was made abroad.

The award is not subject to appeal unless the parties agree otherwise. This is one of the advantages of the arbitration procedure: it allows the parties to obtain a final decision in a few months (8 to 12 months on average at the CMAP), as opposed to several years before the state judges.

The award rendered in France in international arbitration matters can only be appealed by way of annulment (Article 1518 CPC), which must be filed within one month of the notification of the arbitral award.

In international arbitration, the parties may even expressly waive recourse to annulment by special agreement.

Mediation and Conciliation refer to the dispute resolution process in which two or more parties attempt to reach an amicable agreement with the help of a third party.

There are few differences between conventional mediation and conventional conciliation.

However, judicial mediation and judicial conciliation are governed by different laws.

Article 21 of the CPC provides that “it is part of the judge’s mission to reconcile the parties”.

Judicial conciliation is therefore implemented by the judge him/herself or by a court conciliator to whom he/she will have delegated the mission of conciliation.

However, judicial mediation is entrusted to a mediator, an external party to the jurisdiction. As provided in Article 131-1 of the CPC, the judge may designate the mediator if the parties agree. Conciliation is free, whereas mediation is a chargeable service.

Any mediator or arbitrator must be independent, neutral and impartial with respect to the parties. He must also disclose any circumstances which, in the eyes of the parties, would be likely to affect his independence and/or impartiality.

In addition to an ethical charter to which CMAP mediators and arbitrators are subject, the Center takes care, before each case is set up, to ask its mediators and arbitrators to sign a specific declaration of independence for each case