Solving Disagreements

Click here to read the complete article

118 – October, 2014

By Debra Vey Voda-Hamilton, Esq./Mediator www.hamiltonlawandmediation.com

When dog owners and handlers leave an unsatisfactory exhibiting partnership with each other they often feel either anger or relief about the termination. Common reasons for termination are:

• The handler was not meeting expectations

• The owner was not paying the agreed-upon fees

• Individually, either were too demanding

Often these working relationships are based on a handshake. Recently, however, these parties have begun to enter into written contracts. The contracts are meant to outline services to be rendered, the cost of those services, and the method of termination. Parties often use an attorney to draft their agreements. The agreement should be set forth in writing how you want to maintain and terminate the relationship. The key terms are cemented in writing. Agreeing to these terms, at the contract’s inception, enables parties to maintain their relationship during and after their association. When you set up the entrance and exit strategies in a contract when things are going well, when the time may come to use the exit terms the parties can exit gracefully, dissolution goes smoothly and the relationship among parties is retained.

When these dog show relationships break up it is often traumatic for all parties involved. Everyone associated with a heavily campaigned dog has feelings for one another and for the dog being exhibited. Breakups can be exacerbated by the need to explain, to anyone who will listen, your side of the story. The dissolution of the team also often becomes fodder for the dog show gossip gristmill. Serious problems arise if the parties have agreed to keep the reason for the termination confidential. If they do discuss it, it can potentially create consternation and possible legal action.

A fine example of ‘how to’ terminate a relationship gracefully occurred in 2012 between the designer Nicolas Ghesquiere and the fashion house Balenciaga. Fashion house and designer break-ups can be as emotional as dog show owner and handler break-ups. The Ghesquiere and Balenciaga relationship ending came as a surprise to the fashion world. The parties worked out a termination agreement requiring Ghesquiere to say nothing that would reflect negatively on Balenciaga. Sound familiar? This expectation of privacy is often what colleagues in the dog show world would like to have happen when their relationships break up.

However, as with dog show team break-ups, Ghesquiere spoke specifically and disparagingly about Balenciaga in a fashion magazine interview two months later. As you probably guessed, Balenciaga brought a lawsuit. This could have gotten ugly, especially after Ghesquiere further complicated things by explaining he was speaking about the fashion industry as a whole and not specifically about his time with Balenciaga. Yet, it didn’t.

The Paris Civil Court convinced Ghesquiere and Balenciaga to try mediation first. It felt an attempt to resolve this disagreement and reach an agreement before litigation ensued might be beneficial to both parties. The matter, though highly volatile and emotional, found a way to settlement. The dispute ended quietly, the terms of the agreement were kept confidential, and the parties now wave to each other at fashion week.

I used this case as an example of how Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) practices can help resolve matters of such an emotional nature. Ghesquiere and Balenciaga were hurt and angry. Yet they recognized the reality of having to see each other again and again at major fashion events. The court’s requirement that they pursue ADR piqued their interest. It supported their desire ‘not’ to live in constant angst.

This case is also applicable to disputes between dog owners and handlers. Why? Because both disputes:

• Were very emotional

• The parties had difficulty discussing meaningful solutions

• Once attorneys were hired, party conversations ceased

• Discretion may be the better part of valor yet anger often dilutes discretion

• The parties failed to respect their prior agreement on how to proceed

The Paris Court’s bold guidance of applying mediation to this disagreement allowed the parties to recognize what was in their best interest to essentially self-determine the outcome of the case; which the Court clearly preferred over a bench decree. And it was.

If more courts would apply mediation to disagreements between dog owners and handlers it could provide the same beneficial outcome. It allows parties a means by which they can quickly and quietly settle their dispute, even if it has already entered the Court system. Savvy judges need only recognize the emotion fueling these disagreements. Requiring mediation and allow a professional mediator to assist the parties in getting their feelings heard, respected and understood will help avoid a long, costly relationship ending with litigation.

Take a tip from the Paris Court overseeing the conflict between the fashion house of Balenciaga and the designer Ghesquiere and use mediation first. Give yourself the chance to recognize your issues, acknowledge any wrongdoing or mistake and solve for the best resolution.

You see each other every weekend. Finding a party-driven solution, confidentially, creates the pathway for retained relationships and continued enjoyment of this sport we love.

(CR) HLM All Rights Reserved 2014

Short URL: http://caninechronicle.com/?p=61259

Posted by ralbee on Oct 14 2014. Filed under Current Articles, Editorial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.