Teaching Guide

The nine case studies that follow were prepared by students of our Harvard Law School research seminar in the Spring of 2019. Based on interviews with the key litigants, lawyers, and presiding JDR judges, they detail actual JDRs in Alberta, Canada and are are published with the permission of the parties. Names are fictional and some facts have been changed to preserve the confidentiality of the parties involved.

In a law school course on mediation or ADR, all nine cases can be used to raise important questions about the practice of mediation, particularly the role of lawyers; styles of mediation (i.e., facilitative vs. evaluative vs. transformative); the ethical obligations of the mediator; the rights of the parties; and the difficulties of evaluating outcomes. Although numerous published case studies recreate the details of mediation processes, we have found none that provide a detailed review—after the fact and from the perspectives of all the parties—of mediation as it is practiced by sitting judges. As we discussed in the book, JDR in Canada is similar in some respects to U.S. mini-trials, judicial conferences, and court-annexed private mediation, all of which were shaped by the “multi-door courthouse” idea derived from the contributions of our Harvard Law School colleague Professor Frank Sander.

The cases cover a range of civil disputes and can be used as a focal point for discussion in law school classes on torts, property, family law, environmental law, negotiation, labor law, procedural law, law and psychology, and insurance law. Table 1 indicates which cases are most relevant to various law school classes along with corresponding page numbers where the case is referenced in the book to highlight a key feature of JDR as it is practiced in Canada. It is followed by a summary of each case and the key teaching points that deserve special attention.

Case Summaries and Key Teaching Points

The Contaminated Land Case

This case involves a plaintiff who took out a mortgage to purchase a land parcel for development. Despite the obstacle of the land being contaminated, the plaintiff went to great lengths to pay off his debts to the mortgage lender, including handing over his family's country home. Nonetheless, these efforts over many years did not meet the lender's expectation regarding interest and principal repayment and resulted in several lawsuits.