Statute Details
- Title: Mediation Rules 2017
- Act Code: MA2017-R1
- Legislative Type: Subsidiary legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Mediation Act 2017
- First Made / Commencement (as shown): 1 November 2017 (SL 624/2017)
- Current Version: 2025 Revised Edition (2 June 2025); current version as at 27 March 2026
- Key Provisions: Rule 1 (Citation); Rule 2 (Prescribed information under section 12(3)(c) of the Act)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Mediation Rules 2017 are subsidiary legislation made under the Mediation Act 2017. In practical terms, these Rules focus on one core compliance point: they prescribe the minimum information that a mediated settlement agreement must contain for the purposes of section 12(3)(c) of the Mediation Act 2017.
Mediation is designed to help parties resolve disputes without a full court trial. When mediation succeeds, the parties typically record their settlement in a written agreement. The Mediation Rules 2017 ensure that such agreements include key identifying and substantive details—so that the settlement can be understood, verified, and (where relevant) relied upon in subsequent processes.
Although the Rules are short, they are important for practitioners because they translate a statutory requirement into a concrete checklist. If a mediated settlement agreement omits required information, it may create avoidable disputes about validity, enforceability, or compliance with the Mediation Act framework.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Rule 1 (Citation) is straightforward. It provides the short title: the Rules are called the Mediation Rules 2017. This is standard drafting and does not create substantive obligations.
The substantive content is in Rule 2, which is the operative provision. Rule 2 states that, for the purposes of section 12(3)(c) of the Mediation Act 2017, a mediated settlement agreement must contain all of the following information. The word “must” indicates a mandatory requirement: a practitioner should treat each item as a required element, not merely a best practice.
Rule 2(a): Name of each party. The agreement must list the name of each party to the mediated settlement agreement. This is fundamental for clarity and for avoiding later arguments about who is bound. In drafting, counsel should ensure that the names match the parties’ legal identities (e.g., exact company names, registered names, or correct personal names), and—where relevant—include identifying details that prevent confusion between similarly named entities.
Rule 2(b): Name of each mediator. The agreement must include the name of each mediator conducting the mediation. This matters because mediation may involve one or more mediators, and the mediator’s identity can be relevant to accountability, process integrity, and any subsequent questions about the mediation’s conduct.
Rule 2(c): Name of the mediation service provider (if any). The agreement must state the name of the mediation service provider (if any) administering the mediation. This is particularly relevant where mediation is organised through an institution, centre, or platform. If there is no service provider, the agreement should be drafted to reflect that position clearly (e.g., “N/A” or an equivalent statement), rather than leaving the field blank.
Rule 2(d): Certification scheme(s) (if any). The agreement must include the name of each certification scheme (if any) under which each mediator is certified. This provision is a compliance and transparency requirement. Practitioners should verify the mediator’s certification status and the relevant scheme name(s) before finalising the settlement agreement. Where a mediator holds certification under more than one scheme, the agreement should capture each scheme to avoid incomplete disclosure.
Rule 2(e): Date the mediated settlement agreement is made. The agreement must contain the date on which the mediated settlement agreement is made. This date can be important for determining timelines, obligations, and any subsequent procedural steps. Counsel should ensure the date reflects the actual execution or “making” of the agreement, consistent with the parties’ intention and the agreement’s execution mechanics.
Rule 2(f): Terms of the settlement. Finally, the agreement must set out the terms of the settlement reached by the parties at the mediation. This is the substantive heart of the document. While the Rules do not prescribe a particular format (e.g., whether the terms must be in numbered clauses), they require that the settlement terms be included. Practitioners should draft settlement terms with sufficient specificity to reduce ambiguity—particularly on payment amounts, timelines, deliverables, and any releases or acknowledgements.
Notably, Rule 2 does not list other common elements that practitioners may include in settlement agreements (such as confidentiality clauses, non-admission statements, or dispute resolution for residual issues). The Rules set a minimum prescribed information standard. Counsel should still consider whether additional clauses are needed for commercial and legal completeness, but they must not omit any of the Rule 2 items.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Mediation Rules 2017 are structured as a compact set of Rules. Based on the extract provided, the Rules consist of:
Rule 1 — Citation (identifies the Rules by name).
Rule 2 — Prescribed information under section 12(3)(c) of the Mediation Act 2017 (sets out the mandatory checklist for mediated settlement agreements).
In other words, the Rules do not create a broad procedural code for mediation. Instead, they operate as a targeted compliance instrument ensuring that mediated settlement agreements contain specified information.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Mediation Rules 2017 apply to mediated settlement agreements made in the context of mediation under the Mediation Act 2017. Practically, this means the Rules are relevant to parties and counsel who draft, review, or execute settlement agreements arising from mediation.
While the Rules are framed as requirements for the content of a mediated settlement agreement, the compliance burden will typically fall on the parties’ legal representatives and the mediation process administrators (including any mediation service provider) to ensure the agreement is properly completed. Mediators and service providers may also be involved in confirming mediator identities, certification schemes, and administrative details.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Even though the Mediation Rules 2017 contain only one substantive rule, they have real operational impact. In practice, settlement agreements are often finalised quickly after mediation sessions. The Rule 2 checklist provides a clear standard that helps prevent omissions that could later undermine confidence in the settlement documentation.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the Rules are important because they connect the mediated settlement agreement to the statutory mediation framework. If a settlement agreement is missing prescribed information, it may be challenged on compliance grounds. Even where the parties are in agreement, incomplete documentation can create friction in implementation—such as when counterparties seek clarification, when internal governance requires proof of mediator credentials, or when the settlement needs to be presented in a formal context.
Additionally, Rule 2(d) on certification schemes reflects a broader policy goal: transparency about mediator qualifications. This can matter in disputes about whether the mediation was conducted by appropriately certified mediators, and it can be relevant for parties who rely on mediator credentials when deciding to mediate.
Finally, Rule 2(f) ensures that the settlement agreement is not merely procedural or aspirational. It must include the terms of the settlement. This requirement supports enforceability in a practical sense: the parties should be able to identify what they agreed to do, by when, and on what basis.
Related Legislation
- Mediation Act 2017
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Mediation Rules 2017 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.