The main purpose of the article is to determine the mutual relations between mediation and court proceedings, as well as to answer the question whether mediation services provided by out-of-court entities should be considered as a part of the justice system and fulfill the constitutional right to court. The conducted research leads to the conclusion that both the judiciary and mediation should be considered as complementary methods of dispute resolution, although the first of them is granted primacy under the Polish Constitution i.a. due to the fact that mediation settlements are subject to court approval and not all types of disputes can be resolved bindingly in mediation. Mediation does not belong sensu sticto to the definition of the judiciary and does not fulfill the right to justice but may be included in a broad understanding of the judiciary and therefore its existence according to current regulations does not violate the position and rules of functioning of the judicial system. However, this situation can easily change, if the mandatory mediation planned by the legislator in divorce and legal separation cases comes into force.

Nowadays, international disputes appear in the public space, which results, for example, from the fact that the needs are unlimited and the goods are limited. Due to its specific nature, the international environment requires a compromise between the entities operating in it. A desirable direction in case of conflicts between international entities is to resolve them by peaceful means. In the international environment, one of the largest international organizations - the United Nations - is of great significance, especially in the field of maintaining international order and peace. In turn, according to the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, it is possible to resolve international disputes by peaceful means, and among the characteristic methods used in this type of proceedings is the mediation method, the effectiveness of which allows, in the long term, to maintain the desired state of peace, strengthening the legal security of the state.

Disputes are inherent in social relations, so the role of the legislator is to introduce rules under which they can be resolved. The methods that make it possible to resolve them include ADR methods. Mediation as an alternative form of dispute resolution has been known since antiquity, nowadays its precursor is the United States of America, where at the turn of the 1970s and 1980s alternative methods of conflict resolution were developed. Mediation, next to bargaining and social arbitration, is one of the peaceful methods of solving collective labour disputes. It should be stressed that as a peaceful method of resolving collective disputes, it can be treated as one of the instruments of social dialogue. Dialogue is an inmamental feature of dispute resolution regardless of its typology, and in the case of collective disputes it can be a guarantor of the preservation of social peace. Hence, it is very important to create a legal framework and introduce instruments to increase its effectiveness.

The article presents an analysis of whether notaries can act as mediators in Lithuania. In particular, can the notaries effectively lead mediation in family and inheritance cases. The authors conclude that notaries are able to act as mediators in such matters under applicable law Lithuanian and EU law.

The article presents maters of contemporary Labour Law and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Switzerland, regulated – or “outlined” – for the first time only recently. Amongst main things the study refers to such matters as: arbitration and collective employment contracts, mediation, and arbitrability of international and domestic labour disputes. These are presented thoroughly and compared with conclusions, and future options.

The Role of Republic of Türkiye in the Mediation between Ukraine and Russia

Since the armed attack of the Russian Federation on Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the Republic of Türkiye has been to mediate between the conflicting parties as a part of extensive diplomatic activities, the primary goal of which is to induce the parties to a ceasefire, work out peace terms, and, finally, end the war. Although Ankara’s mediation has not yet led to the expected breakthrough, it has managed to reach an agreement on grain exports and exchange prisoners of war. The paper aims to analyse the role of Türkiye as a mediator in Russia’s war against Ukraine, indicating the conditions of Türkiye ‘s involvement in the mediation, and verify the effects of Turkish diplomacy in the short and long-term. Regarding the defined objectives, the following research assumptions were adopted. First, in the face of Russian aggression against Ukraine, Türkiye adopted the ‘strategic autonomy’, which allowed it to maintain its credibility in mediations between the parties and to take care of vital interests in the area of security and economy. Second, Türkiye’s involvement in the mediation has contributed to the country’s increased importance and prestige in the international arena, which is an important element of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s neo-Ottoman strategy that has been implemented for two decades. Third, Ankara’s diplomatic offensive contributed to the warming of Turkish-American relations, which have been in deep crisis since 2016. The following research instruments were used in the preparation of the text: analysis, synthesis, and inference.