A 2025 Perspective
THE AUTHOR:
Raoul J. Sievers, Visiting Professional, SCC Arbitration Institute
Following an update to its Mediation Rules in 2023, the SCC Arbitration Institute (SCC) has revised its Mediation Rules again for the beginning of 2025. The time is therefore ripe to analyse the caseload developments as well as the new provisions governing mediations administered by the SCC.
History and Statistics on Caseload
History
Mediation services have been offered by the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce since 1999 when the Mediation Institute was first established to assist in the settlement of both domestic and international disputes (BR Lindell, Chapter 31: Sweden, in: N Alexander, S Walsh, et al., EU Mediation Law Handbook, Global Trends in Dispute Resolution, Vol. 7, 2017, p. 768). In 2014, the Mediation Institute merged with the SCC to form a unified institutional body for both mediation and arbitration.
Caseload Statistics
The SCC administered a total of 51 mediation cases between 2003 and 2023. With the introduction of the 2023 version of the Mediation Rules, mediation at the SCC started gaining traction with the SCC registering a further five cases in 2024 alone.
SCC Mediation, as a consensual means of dispute resolution, relies on both parties’ consent. This results in a considerable share of cases being dismissed for lack of agreement with the counterparty (see also Yi Ting Sam, Mediation proceedings at the SCC Arbitration Institute 2017–2022, section 2). Nevertheless, the SCC notes that in 29 instances (54%), the dispute was referred to a mediator after the counterparty consented to mediation. Mediations administered by the SCC concerned a total amount in dispute of EUR 120.9 million, with an average of EUR 3 million per dispute (this excludes 16 cases where information on the disputed amount was not available to the SCC).
Most disputes concerned amounts ranging either between EUR 100,001 and EUR 1,000,000 (14 cases) or between EUR 1,000,001 and EUR 5,000,000 (13 cases).
International Mediations
Since 2003, 27 mediations (48%) were international, i.e., at least one of the parties was not registered in Sweden. The 29 further cases concerned domestic disputes. In total, the parties to SCC administered mediations came from 20 different jurisdictions, predominantly from Sweden, Germany, England, Latvia, and Italy. Similarly, 27 mediations were conducted in English (48%), with the remaining 29 cases being mediated in Swedish (52%).
Similarly, the SCC saw mediators coming from a multitude of jurisdictions across three continents, with cases referred to professionals from Egypt, England, Finland, the Netherlands, and the United States, among others.
Where the parties’ agreement provided for a seat, most mediations were seated in Stockholm (72%). The SCC also administered mediations with the seat in Gothenburg (10%), and Malmö (3%) as well as outside of Sweden in Kyiv, Ukraine.
A Multitude of Sectors, Industries, and Types of Agreements
The cases brought under the SCC Mediation Rules stemmed from many different types of contracts. Most common were disputes arising out of or in connection with delivery agreements (15%), purchase agreements (15%), and corporate agreements (11%).
Mediations initiated before the SCC concerned a multitude of different branches, sectors, and industries, with a third of the disputes arising in the consumer goods sector (33%). Other mediations involved the manufacturing industry (12%), finance (9%), the automotive industry (9%), and the public sector (9%).
An Emphasis on Procedural Efficiency
Mediations administered by the SCC maintain the high efficiency encountered under other SCC services. Out of the 29 mediations referred to a mediator, 20 were concluded within three months of referral of the case to the mediator (69%). In another seven disputes, mediation was completed within the following three months (24%), leaving only two cases that took more than six months to conclude (seven and nine months, respectively).
These numbers result in an average duration of an SCC-administered mediation of 2.9 months between the referral of the case to the mediator and the conclusion of structured negotiations.
Mediations Under the SCC Mediation Rules 2025
Procedure Under the SCC Mediation Rules – Voluntary at its Core
Under the Swedish Mediation Act (the Act), non-compliance with a pre-arbitration mediation agreement does not affect the admissibility of a claim or the jurisdiction of the adjudicator under the Act (see Art. 3 of the Act). This understanding was adopted in the SCC Mediation Rules and the SCC’s combined Model Mediation Clause (available here), which grants each party the right to object to pre-arbitration mediation.
In emphasizing the consent-based nature of such pre-requirement, the clause upholds the view that referral of a case to mediation should be voluntary and bypassed where a party considers initiation of a final and binding dispute resolution mechanism more appropriate (J Lowther, The SCC’s Combination Dispute Resolution Clauses: A Leap of Faith or the Best of Both Worlds?, Jus Mundi Arbitration Review (JMAR) Vol. 1 Issue 2, 2024, para. 60; cf. R Oldenstam, K Löf, J Ragnwaldh, A Foerster, F Ringquist, R Rylander, C Monell, Guide till kommersiell tvistlösning, Mannheimer Swartling Advokatbyrå, 2021, 4th edition, pp. 37 et seq).
Similarly, where a request for mediation is submitted by only one party, the Secretariat will enquire whether the other party agrees to participate. The Secretariat will dismiss the case if the other party does not consent, either by not replying in due time or by expressing disagreement (see Art. 4(5) of the SCC Mediation Rules 2025). Lack of consent led to dismissal in 15 cases (29%), with 11 parties disagreeing (21%) and 4 not responding in time (8%). In 7 cases, the request was withdrawn before referral, possibly indicating settlement (13%).
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the case shall be referred to one mediator, appointed by the Board. The SCC notes that parties often use their autonomy to agree on and appoint the mediator. 37% of mediators were appointed by the parties, with the SCC appointing the rest. Once the mediator is appointed and costs are paid, the Secretariat refers the dispute to the mediator. The caseload analysis revealed mediations were effective, with most referred cases ending in settlement agreements (this excludes 14 cases which were referred for which, however, no information is available as to the reasons for termination).
In case of settlement, the parties and the mediator may agree to appoint the mediator as an arbitrator and request confirmation of the settlement agreement in an arbitral award. This has only occurred in one instance.
New Remuneration Scheme in Force 2025
The 2025 revision of the SCC Mediation Rules focused on mediator remuneration. While institutional remuneration schemes for arbitral proceedings rely on sophisticated models, many institutions adopted only slightly modified versions of these schemes for calculating mediation costs. With some institutions’ administration fees ranging from USD 5,000 to USD 30,000 (see Art. 2 Appendix ICC Mediation Rules), parties may find themselves paying institutional costs far exceeding the mediator’s fees. A closer look at these institutions’ remuneration schemes reveals the reason. Besides non-refundable registration fees, administrative fees are widely calculated on ad valorem. In contrast, mediators are generally paid based on the time spent on a case. In mediations, which may concern substantial amounts in dispute but rarely exceed two hearing days, this results in parties paying more for the institution’s administrative services than for the mediator’s efforts to facilitate settlement – the core of any mediation.
The SCC’s Previous Practice
Prior to the revision of the remuneration scheme, the practice of the SCC included a non-refundable registration fee of EUR 1,500. Administrative fees were determined ad valorem, based on the amount in dispute, ranging from EUR 1,500 to EUR 30,000. Mediators were remunerated with EUR 4,000 for each day of mediation hearings plus an additional one-time EUR 4,000 for preparatory work. Based on the Secretariat’s experience that most mediations did not require more than one hearing day, preliminary mediator fees were commonly fixed at EUR 8,000.
This was in line with the practices of other institutions such as the FAI, the ICC, and the VIAC. All of these institutions demand non-refundable registration fees ranging from EUR 500 to EUR 3,000 and ad valorem administrative fees between EUR 500 and EUR 30,000. In contrast, the LCIA assesses its administrative fee based on time spent by the Secretariat in the administration of the mediation with hourly rates ranging from GBP 190 to GBP 300 (approx. EUR 230 to EUR 360). All institutions calculate the mediator’s fee based on time spent by the mediator with the LCIA being the only institution providing an indication on the payable fee.
In mediations administered by the SCC, administrative fees (excluding the non-refundable registration fee) averaged EUR 5,100, while non-refundable registration fees (which were altered throughout the years) increased the overall average administrative fee to EUR 6,000. Mediators received an average fee of EUR 9,500. However, the SCC Secretariat noted instances where administrative fees were comparable to the mediator’s remuneration. In four cases, the administrative fee alone exceeded the mediator’s remuneration (13%). Considering the non-refundable registration fees for mediations administered by the SCC, institutional costs matched or exceeded the mediator’s fees in six mediations (19%). While such instances could be prevented by introducing an ad valorem remuneration scheme for the mediator’s fees, such a revision would not align with the remuneration schemes for other SCC services. Furthermore, the analysis of the caseload administered by the SCC revealed recurring issues in determining the amount in dispute in mediations.
Reforming the Costs of SCC Mediation
The SCC revised the remuneration scheme under the SCC Mediation Rules removing the previous registration fee and introducing a fixed administration fee at EUR 4,000 as well as fixed mediator fees at EUR 16,000. Entering into force on 1 January 2025, this change provides for predictability of mediation costs. It is also in line with fee rates of other SCC services. In assessing an appropriate fee for SCC Mediation, the Secretariat and the Board drew comparisons to SCC Express and SCC Emergency Arbitrator. For example, an SCC Emergency Arbitrator renders an interim decision within five days of referral for a fixed fee of EUR 16,000. In SCC Express, the Neutral renders an assessment of the issues in dispute within 21 days against a fee in the amount of EUR 25,000. Under both schemes, the administrative fee is fixed at EUR 4,000.
While the average SCC Mediation takes between two and three months, the workload and intensity differ compared to the services rendered by the Emergency Arbitrator and the Neutral. Consequently, the Board determined the mediator’s fee to match that of an Emergency Arbitrator at EUR 16,000 while adopting the administrative fee under both services at EUR 4,000.
The new remuneration scheme provides predictable mediation costs and eliminates the possibility of administrative fees exceeding the mediator’s remuneration. It decreases institutional costs by an average of EUR 2,000, fixing fees at EUR 4,000 compared to the previous average of EUR 6,000. Furthermore, it emphasizes the value of the mediator’s services by fixing their fee at EUR 16,000 compared to the previous average fee of EUR 9,500.
Summary
Mediation services have been offered by the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce since 1999. Since 2003, the SCC has administered over 50 mediations, roughly half of which were international, involving parties and mediators from over 20 jurisdictions in disputes across various sectors, industries, and agreements. These mediations, with a mean amount in dispute of EUR 3 million, were concluded within an average of 2.9 months.
In line with the Swedish understanding of mediation and its emphasis on maintaining business relationships, SCC Mediation remains voluntary at its core, requiring both parties’ consent to proceed. Such consent was found in the majority of cases, and the majority of these disputes, once referred to a mediator, were terminated by a settlement agreement between the parties.
Moreover, the 2025 revisions to the SCC Mediation Rules introduce a progressive take on mediation costs. The new remuneration scheme comprehensively addresses questions faced by arbitral institutions, where the established co-existence of non-refundable registration fees, ad valorem administrative fees, and time-based mediator fees led to situations in which institutional costs exceeded the mediator’s remuneration. It does so by introducing fixed fees, resulting in below-average institutional costs and above-average mediator fees. This ensures greater predictability of the costs of mediation.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Raoul J. Sievers is a PhD candidate at Humboldt University specializing in international arbitration. He is enrolled in the LL.M. program in international commercial arbitration law at Stockholm University and serves as a visiting professional at the SCC Arbitration Institute having previously worked with the international arbitration team at Freshfields in Berlin and Frankfurt.
*The views and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.
