Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MARCH 2026

Burst Pipes And Legal Rites: A Case Study On Mediation Confidentiality

Lewis Silkin
Lewis Silkin
Contributor
Lewis Silkin

Lewis Silkin

Joint managing partners: Jo Farmer, Richard Miskella International offices: Dublin, Hong Kong...

View firm profile
Explore more from Lewis Silkin

What happens in mediation stays in mediation – or at least, that is the expectation. For parties engaged in settlement negotiations, the ability to speak candidly without fear of their words being later used against...

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

What happens in mediation stays in mediation – or at least, that is the expectation. For parties engaged in settlement negotiations, the ability to speak candidly without fear of their words being later used against them is not merely a procedural nicety.

It is the very foundation upon which effective mediation rests. But what happens when one party, having failed to reach a settlement, seeks to prise open the door to the mediation room in subsequent court proceedings? The District Court decision in Lam Shun Yuen v Wong Suet Kiu [2024] HKDC 2056 provides a firm answer: that door remains closed.

Hong Kong's approach to mediation confidentiality reflects a robust commitment to protecting privileged communications. Lam Shun Yuen is a useful illustration of how stringently Hong Kong courts guard mediation communications, and the high threshold parties must meet to obtain disclosure.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from