Is it ever right for a mediator to intervene or express an opinion about a dispute and a possible resolution? Sometimes the answer to a dispute is obvious to the mediator but the parties are blind to it, being so entrenched. A mediator with a legal background may be able to say which side has the better legal case.
I recently dealt with a neighbour dispute where the parties were arguing over a small patch of land and about a neighbour crossing over their land when they had no right to do so as they didn’t own it. They had placed obstacles in the neighbour’s way. The neighbour just wanted to be able to access their house and felt that the only way was across the neighbour’s land. Looking at the plans there was an alternative route which minimised the crossing over the land. As the mediation was time limited I pointed this out and asked the parties to consider whether this might be a reasonable solution. They both latched on to this solution and arrangements were made for the parties to meet and agree the alternative route. The parties were both keen to row back from the dispute and were able to save face because the suggestion had come from the mediator. A legal case about the access issue would have been very costly.