There is no consent regarding the nature and effects that should be given to a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) in the international level. Consequently, some jurisdictions conceive it merely as a contract with the correspondent enforcement procedure, whereas others seek to provide it with a stronger effect homologating the MSA with a judgment or even an arbitral award. In this diverse setting, the Ecuadorian experience presents an interesting case of analysis because it provides the MSA with the same effects of a final judgment and of res judicata establishing a summary enforcement procedure. Such disposition provides the MSA with an original nature that in a way combines both contracts and judgments. Therefore, the document containing the MSA has been defined as an authentic instrument product of an alternative mechanism for the administration of justice, which provides it with the effects of a final judgment and of res judicata, and that contains a typified or nominated convention which essential characteristics are determined by the Arbitration and Mediation Law.
Journal of International Arbitration