While no theoretical distinction can be drawn between the performances of sportsmen and women, and those of other performers, under English Law, Performers’ Rights do not extend to sportsmen and women. This runs counter to the trend of protection in other jurisdictions.

‘The economic arguments for granting Performers’ Rights to sportsmen have become compelling, for example with the introduction of television channels devoted solely to sport. Similarly, with the moral argument for protection: a sportsman’s sporting prowess is as much an aspect of his personality as a musician’s artistry. There is no principal reason for saying that an opera singer should be accorded rights in his or her performance and not a football player. [However] as matters stand a sportsman’s commentary on another’s performance is protected, but not his own performance.’ (‘Performance Rights’, Sixth edition by Richard Arnold Sweet & Maxwell, 2021 para 1-124).

In Mediation, parties can agree to confer Performer Rights on Sportsmen and Women, which can be negotiated and agreed between them as a matter of contract, along with fair remuneration for the commercial exploitation of their performances.

Note also, that in England and Wales, ‘Image Rights’ (also known as ‘Personality Rights’ or ‘Publicity Rights’), which are an artist’s ‘proprietary rights’ in their ‘personality’, and is linked to ‘branding’ and ‘endorsement’, are not codified by statute.

Consequently, unauthorised use of a person’s name and image is litigated in this jurisdiction by claiming for:

(i) Breach of contract;
(ii) Infringement of a Trade Mark;
(iii) Passing off;
(iv) Defamation;
(v) Malicious falsehood;
(vi) Breach of confidence;
(vii) Breach of advertising rules; or
(viii) Breach of privacy.

These commercial disputes can all be resolved by Mediation.

Some members of 1EC Barristers specialise in Sports Law. I do not, and the focus of my next book is the ‘Mediation of Art Music & Performer Disputes’ – see my recent post about this – ‘We can work it out – Mediation of Art Music & Performer Disputes.’ https://lnkd.in/ei4tiQqc

Having said that, what I am pointing out in this post, is that some of the ‘Mediation Tools’ in ‘Art Music & Performer Disputes’, can also be used in the Commercial Mediation of Sportsmen Disputes.

I wonder how many legal practitioners and parties involved in Sportsmen Disputes are aware of this legal and commercial nexus?

Section 180(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (‘CDPA 1988’) provides:

‘In this Part — “performance” means —

(a) a dramatic performance (which includes dance and mime),

(b) a musical performance,

(c) a reading or recitation of a literary work, or

(d) a performance of a variety act or any similar presentation,

which is, or so far as it is, a live performance given by one or more individuals; and “recording”, in relation to a performance, means a film or sound recording—

(a) made directly from the live performance,

(b) made from a broadcast of the performance, or

(c) made, directly or indirectly, from another recording of the performance.’

While in general ‘sporting performances’ are outside the ambit of this definition, arguably certain sports qualify by way of exception, including:

• Ballroom Dancing;
• Ice Dancing; and
• Figure Skating,

Because they are all forms of ‘dance’ within category (a).

The mere fact of competition should not alter this.

If ‘variety act’ is interpreted as referring to ‘circus performances’, then it may also be possible to include sports such as gymnastics within the ambit of the words ‘or any similar presentation’ i.e. because it is difficult to make a distinction between gymnastics and Circus high-wire or trapeze acts.

‘[There] is nothing in the 1988 Act to exclude performances which otherwise fall within the definition of ‘”performance” merely because they are sporting activities. (Arnold para 2-18).

As I mentioned in an earlier post, my next live Zoom webinar to be presented to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide in 2025 is entitled – ‘Mediation Advocacy in Music & Performers’ Rights Disputes.’

This is provisionally scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday 20 November 2025.

I am also writing an article about this for submission to the Journal of Mediation Theory and Practice in October for publication worldwide.

The idea recently occurred to me that I should also write in depth about the ‘Commercial Mediation of Art Music & Performer Disputes’.

So, I have decided to change the working title of my next book to – ‘Mediation of Art Music & Performer Disputes.’

This will be written as a practical handbook for Commercial Mediators, Mediation Advocates, and their clients – globally, and I will post an update about this on the ‘My next book’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk, later on in the year.

I have recently discovered a legal intersection between:
(i) Intellectual Property Rights; and
(ii) Cultural Property Law,

and while the Art disputes that I plan to discuss in the book go beyond Cultural Property Repatriation claims to include e.g. Misattribution of Art and Antiquities sold at auction, i.e. in London and in regional auction houses, I am still planning to include a detailed discussion of Mediation and Mediation Advocacy in International Cultural Heritage Disputes.

As a common theme, IPR runs through Art Music and Performer Disputes – so I am hoping that the book will also have a wider appeal to all of those involved in Commercial Mediation – globally.

Not least, because it appears to me, that the creative use of IPR & knowhow as a ‘dispute settlement tool’ is underused and often overlooked by those involved in Commercial Mediation.

As I explained in my recent post about ‘Creative problem solving in Commercial Mediation using IPR & Knowhow?’ –

‘In Commercial Mediation, joint-creation/exploitation/ licensing & Assignment of ‘Intellectual Property Rights’ (‘IPR’) & ‘Knowhow’ – which are both also linked to ‘Tax-Efficiency’ & contractual ‘Deal-Structuring’ = potential common ground for agreeing terms of a mutually beneficial commercial deal in settlement of a dispute.’

As far as I am aware, this idea/’Mediation tool’, has not been explored and discussed in any depth in the leading books that have been published around the world about Commercial Mediation. So, there would appear to be a significant gap in the literature about ‘Commercial Mediation.’

There is also an intersection here with ‘Ethics in Negotiation’ – because as I explain in my article published online by the CMC: https://lnkd.in/e-6R–iv

‘Spiralling costs in litigation create a power imbalance between an artist and a record company.’

In the immortal word of the Beatles, in Commercial Mediation – ‘We can work it out!’ or rather – the parties, ‘with a little help from’ the Mediator and Mediation Advocates – ‘can work it out!’

Comments added:

‘Carl Islam’s article delves into the complex nature of music disputes and the high litigation risks involved. He outlines various claims, such as breaches of contract and trust, and issues like image rights and copyright infringement. Islam highlights the uncertainty of legal outcomes and advocates for mediation as a beneficial alternative to litigation, promoting collaboration and creative resolutions.’ (Civil Mediation Council introduction to my article published on their website, see: https://lnkd.in/e-6R–iv).

‘Big kudos to Carl Islam for continuing to break new ground with his upcoming book, “Mediation of Art Music & Performer Disputes.” This is essential reading, especially for those of us here in California and beyond who mediate in spaces where art, creativity, IP, and identity collide.

There’s something deeply resonant here for The Me in Mediation™ – the version of ourselves under an internal agreement to keep learning, to keep refining our craft, and to bring every tool available into the mediation room when we help others work through personalized problem-solving of complex relational dynamics.

Carl’s work reminds us that mediation doesn’t live in a vacuum. It intersects with power, culture, money, identity, and creative expression. Whether you’re based in London, LA, or Lagos, this belongs on your shelf.

And if you’re in the business of helping others resolve disputes, this might just help you resolve the ones within yourself too.’ (Jeff Soilson, Mediator in California): https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7330622058533445634/?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A(activity%3A7330622058533445634%2C7330627916218703872)&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A(7330627916218703872%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7330622058533445634)

In Commercial Mediation, joint-creation/exploitation/ licensing & Assignment of ‘Intellectual Property Rights’ (‘IPR’) & ‘Knowhow’ – which are both also linked to ‘Tax-Efficiency’ & contractual ‘Deal-Structuring’ = potential common ground for agreeing terms of a mutually beneficial commercial deal in settlement of a dispute.

There is also an intersection here with ‘Professional Conduct’ & ‘Ethics’, in both the ‘Facilitation’ & ‘Conduct’ of ‘Commercial Negotiations’ in Mediation.

In other words, IPR (while time-limited & jurisdictional) & Knowhow (which is protected under English Law by contractual confidentiality), are potentially creative ‘Deal-Making Tools’ for both Mediators & Mediation Advocates – provided: (i) you have been educated in the application of the underlying principles; (ii) are as we used to say when I worked in-house for Rolls Royce & Alstom – ‘Commercially Switched-On’/’Aware’; & (iii) have ‘Imagination!’

In my experience, very few lawyers that I have dealt with, fulfil all three requirements.

So, likewise, both Mediators and Mediation Advocates involved in Commercial Mediation need to have a working knowledge of the underlying legal principles.

Thus, while a Mediator need not be a legal polymath, they must be multi-disciplinary.

This is brought into sharp focus when you consider where and how IPR and Knowhow can be created and jointly-exploited in a Cultural Heritage dispute, see:

·       ‘Intellectual Property and Cultural Heritage: Towards Interdisciplinarity’ by Fiona Macmillan: https://lnkd.in/eUd9sd86.

·       ‘The notions of intellectual property and cultural heritage: Overlaps and clashes’ by Irini Stamatoudi: https://lnkd.in/eJ_sbmyC.

However, my impression is that neither Museum Trustees nor the legal advisors on either side of a Cultural Heritage Dispute, have much, if any idea, of how a ‘Creative Deal’ can be done by exploring the potential for IPR & Knowhow creation & exploitation.

This is a gap in the literature that I am aiming to fill, when in 2026, I start work on my next book – ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes – Anachronism, Orientalism, Culture, Ethics, Law, IPR & Contracts.’ – See the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

Meanwhile, my next live Zoom webinar to be presented to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide in 2025 is entitled – ‘Mediation Advocacy in Music & Performers’ Rights Disputes.’

This is scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday 20 November 2025.

Both the Talk & the Article, will discuss the potential use of IPR & Knowhow as a Tool of ‘Creative Deal-Making’ in Commercial Mediation.

The range of potential claims include:

– Band splits/departure of a member.
– Breach of confidence.
– Breach of contract e.g. of a booking agency contract, management contract,
music publishing contract, or recording contract.
– Breach of fiduciary duty under a management contract – which is linked to
claims for equitable compensation, rescission, and contract vitiation on the
grounds of undue influence and the doctrine of restraint of trade.
– Image rights (also known as ‘personality rights’ or ‘publicity rights’) i.e. an
artist’s proprietary rights in their personality, which is linked to branding
and endorsement. In England and Wales these rights are not codified.
Unauthorised use of a person’s name and image is litigated by claiming for
breach of contract; infringement of a trade mark; passing off; defamation and
malicious falsehood; breach of confidence; breach of advertising rules; or
breach of privacy.
– Infringement of copyright, plagiarism and sampling without consent.
– Violation of moral rights.
– Passing Off.
– Royalties – calculation and deductibles.
– Share of royalties – claims by session musicians.
– Songwriter split disputes.
– Trade mark infringement – e.g. the band’s name, which is linked to ownership of ‘goodwill’ in the name.

See my published articles:

– ‘Commercial Mediation of Music Disputes: https://lnkd.in/e-6R–iv
– ‘Commercial Mediation of Music Disputes.’ Published in the Law Society.
Gazette 01.12.2023: https://lnkd.in/e2BDGGfZ
– ‘Golden rule in commercial mediation.’ Published online in the Law Society Gazette, 13.05.2024: Golden rule in commercial mediation | Law Gazette: https://lnkd.in/eF_4KtcJ

By way of a refresher, in May I am going back and taking a ‘deep-dive’ into the ‘Mediation of Commercial Music & Performers’ Rights Disputes’, and will post about this in June.

I am going offline until then.

Meanwhile, Music Law, Performers’ Rights and Mediation Geeks (of which I am proud to call myself one!) can read my ‘PRACTICE NOTE ABOUT THE MEDIATION OF MUSIC & PERFORMERS’ RIGHTS DISPUTES’ Carl Islam [Draft 25.05.2024], on the ‘Mediation of Music & Performers’ Rights Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk. Please note that this is an incomplete work in progress. You will need to scroll down to find this. It runs to several hundred pages, so do not print it off! I have included it on my website for my own quick research reference and you are welcome to browse.

The next Institute of Art & Law Study Forum is all day on Saturday 3 May 2025 – https://lnkd.in/ezVdgBkM

The topics and speakers are:

– ‘The Cassirer litigation against Spain in the California courts’ by Anna O’Connell, President and Founder, ADA Arte, Madrid, Spain.

– ‘NFTs and crypto assets reassessed’ by Dr Kristijan Poljanec, Assistant Professor, University of Zagreb.

– ‘Negotiation as a path to resolution in artist disputes’ by Aernoud Bourdrez, lawyer and artist representative, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

– ‘Recent disputes over art in the English courts’ by Angharad Start Barrister, 3 Verulam Buildings.

 ‘The Victorious Youth case and the courts: Italy v The Getty Trust’ by Dr -Alessandro Chechi, Adjunct Professor, University of Siena.

– ‘Human rights and the Statue Wars’ by Professor Tom Lewis, Nottingham Law School, NTU.

These are all highly topical Art Law issues.

So, this is a rare privilege to hear what the distinguished panel of speakers will have to say.

In particular, some of the ‘negotiation’ principles that Aernoud Bourdrez, will discuss, may also be relevant to both Mediators and Mediation Advocates in International Cultural Heritage Disputes, which involve state actors. If it is relevent to his talk, and it may not be, I will ask the following Q:

‘In a Cultural Heritage Repatriation claim, can a Mediated dialogue about the joint-exploitation of IPR in the cultural artefact, potentially reveal common ground that can result in a ‘creative deal’ about: possession, ownership, and lending of the artefact, and the development of a wider ‘cultural exchange relationship’, between the state actors involved?’

I have a special interest in ‘negotiation’ in this context, as the working title of my next book is ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes – Anachronism, Orientalism, Culture, Ethics, Law, IPR & Contracts.’ – See the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

This will be written as both a multi-disciplinary academic course text book for Law Students, and as a handbook for Mediators and Mediation Advocates – globally.

The book will examine and discuss Mediation and Mediation Advocacy, in the context of:

(a) Legal claims for the return to their rightful owner of stolen antiquities, predicated upon title (‘Restitution claims’); and

(b)  Moral claims for the return of illegitimately removed cultural artefacts to the source community or state, based upon:

(i)  International Cultural Heritage law (including Treaties);

(ii)  jus cogens and erga omnes norms of International Law (including ‘inalienability of sovereignty’);

(iii) the existence of ‘Fiduciary Principles’ under International Law;

(iv) ethical principles grounded in moral philosophy (including reparative justice, distributive justice and natural law); and

(vi) the evolving concept of an artefact having and belonging to a cultural home/place i.e. a ‘cultural homeland.’

(‘Repatriation claims’).

In short – ’litigation risk’, i.e. uncertainty of judicial outcome and irrecoverable costs incurred – for all parties involved.

Causes of uncertainty in advising about legal merits include:

·       Inheritance Act cases are evidentially highly ‘fact-sensitive’ claims.
·       While the purpose of the Inheritance (Provision For Family And Dependants) Act 1975 is to make ‘reasonable provision’ for an ‘eligible claimant’ having regard to the matters set out in s.3, the s.3 process itself, is not a ‘weighing’ or ‘balancing’ process.
·       No single factor can determine the success or failure of a claim, i.e. there is never any guarantee of success.
·       The answer to the threshold question ‘has reasonable financial provision been made for the Claimant ?’, is arrived at by a judge making a ‘value judgment’ based upon all of the s.3 factors.
·       The court has no jurisdiction to rewrite a will simply because the scheme of gifting under its terms is, or is perceived to be, unfair.
·       The exercise of the court’s powers comes into play where the threshold question is answered in favour of the Claimant, however, in the case law, there has been a wide divergence between the views as to ‘quantum’ taken at first instance and on appeal.
·       Furthermore, relatively little of the case law has been judicially expounded at a level where the judgment would create a precedent.
·       As Allardice concludes in ‘Of greatest benefit’ (2015) T.E.L & T.J 170, 8-12 (see the 5th Edition of Ross on Inheritance Act Claims (2023) para E-069) – ‘while the case law provides a picture of the 1975 Act landscape, it reveals very few landmarks.’

So, any advice given by a Solicitor or Barrister about the likely judicial outcome of litigation in an Inheritance Act claim, must be taken with a large dose of salt, because no party can ever be certain with any degree of mathematical precision, about what the actual outcome will turn out to be in reality. Particularly, if the case is being heard in a County Court.

That is because no matter what your legal advisors may say, in ‘reality’ i.e. because of the litigation risks highlighted above, the case law, and lack of judicial guidance and precedents in these cases, there is no such thing as an ‘iron-clad’ Inheritance Act claim. That is a fiction.

In other words, these cases are always high risk litigation i.e. a gamble!

So, unless a Claimant has to go to court for some reason, then why not do a deal instead in Mediation?

My next live Zoom webinar to be presented to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide in 2025 is entitled – ‘Mediation Advocacy in the Tax-Efficient Settlement of Inheritance Act, Beneficial Interest & Proprietary Estoppel Claims.’

This is provisionally scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday 20 November 2025.

‘The Black Books are the minutes from the meetings of the Inn’s Council, which date back to 1422. They are so called because they are bound in black leather.’ https://lnkd.in/ey32RKB6

I am a member of Lincoln’s Inn, which is where I was called to the Bar. So, for me personally, this is a great honour that was unimaginable when I was a 2nd 6 month pupil, in what is now Maitland Chambers.

After completing pupillage I re-qualified as a solicitor.

Upon passing what in those days were known as the ‘Law Society Finals’ (of which I was required to pass half the course – including the ‘Accounts’ and ‘Tax’ exams, whilst simulateously working as an articled clerk in the ‘Trusts’, ‘Commercial Property’, and ‘Company and Commercial’ departments of a leading West End International Law firm), I worked as a commercial solicitor in both industry and private practice, until returning to the Bar, when I joined 1 EC Barristers – which in those days was known as 1 Essex Court.

The book was donated to Lincoln’s Inn Library at my request, by the Law Society of England and Wales.

The 2nd Edition of the ‘Contentious Probate Handbook’ was published in print by the Law Society in February.

The Law is stated as at 1 September 2024.

You can order the book using one of the following links:

– https://lnkd.in/dHtHQjBz (who deliver worldwide).
– https://lnkd.in/ejzMFjyn.
– https://lnkd.in/eQeZaqC8.

My next live Zoom webinar to be presented to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide in 2025 is entitled – ‘Mediation Advocacy in the Tax-Efficient Settlement of Inheritance Act, Beneficial Interest & Proprietary Estoppel Claims.’

The working title of my next book is ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes – Anachronism, Orientalism, Culture, Ethics & Law’ – See the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

https://www.lincolnsinn.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Recent-acquisitions-Apr-2025.pdf

This is where ‘Don Quixote’ was conceived and Cervantes began to write one of the greatest novels in Renaissance literature. His ‘impossible dream’ was created inside this prison cell!

https://lnkd.in/euQ4QzSH

‘Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra … 29 September 1547 (assumed) – 22 April 1616 NS) was a Spanish writer widely regarded as the greatest writer in the Spanish language and one of the world’s pre-eminent novelists. He is best known for his novel Don Quixote, a work considered as the first modern novel. The novel has been labelled by many well-known authors as the “best book of all time” and the “best and most central work in world literature”.

Much of his life was spent in relative poverty and obscurity, which led to many of his early works being lost. Despite this, his influence and literary contribution are reflected by the fact that Spanish is often referred to as “the language of Cervantes”.

In 1569, Cervantes was forced to leave Spain and move to Rome, where he worked in the household of a cardinal. In 1570, he enlisted in a Spanish Navy infantry regiment, and was badly wounded at the Battle of Lepanto in October 1571 and lost the use of his left arm and hand. He served as a soldier until 1575, when he was captured by Barbary pirates; after five years in captivity, he was ransomed, and returned to Madrid.

His first significant novel, titled La Galatea, was published in 1585, but he continued to work as a purchasing agent, and later as a government tax collector. Part One of Don Quixote was published in 1605, and Part Two in 1615. Other works include the 12 Novelas ejemplares (Exemplary Novels); a long poem, the Viaje del Parnaso (Journey to Parnassus); and Ocho comedias y ocho entremeses (Eight Plays and Eight Interludes). The novel Los trabajos de Persiles y Sigismunda (The Travails of Persiles and Sigismunda), was published posthumously in 1616.

The cave of Medrano (also known as the casa de Medrano) in Argamasilla de Alba, which has been known since the beginning of the 17th century, and according to the tradition of Argamasilla de Alba, was the prison of Cervantes, [is] the place where he conceived and began to write Don Quixote.’ (Wikipedia).

For your Easter reading, if you have not read Don Quixote, I recommend the English translation by John Rutherford. In this masterpiece Cervantes experimented with various literary devices including humour.

Written during the Catholic ‘Inquisition’ in Spain, subtly woven into the fabic of what on the surface appears to be a comic story, is a profound moral tale, that resonates today.

For Cervantes, who was born into the ‘Golden’ era, when Spain dominated the world, experienced what it meant to be a citizen of the most powerful nation on earth, only to endure a lifetime of watching this ‘super-power’ fall and decline against the discontentment of its people.

https://lnkd.in/eJFz9Yid

In spite of the unimaginable hardships endured by Cervantes inside this prison cell – ‘Genius’ triumphed over Adversity.’

The result – a literary legacy for all mankind that has withstood the test of time and remains relevant today.

That is the power of imagination and words!

1st – Stop shouting at each other!

2nd – Listen.

3rd – Think.

4th – Talk to each other.

‘3RD PRINCIPLE – EMPATHETIC COMMUNICATION – LISTEN TO UNDERSTAND IN ORDER TO BE UNDERSTOOD.

The only way to get someone to do something is to make the other person want to do it. Remember that when dealing with people as opposed to machines, you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures of emotion, bristling with prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity.
Instead of condemning MA2/P2, what you need to do is to try and understand them. Then, you can understand why they have behaved as they did. As MA1/P1, you must put yourself into the shoes of MA2/P2, in order to see things as they do, i.e. each MA must understand the ‘opposing’ point of view through the lens of the other MA/P. Since only unsatisfied needs can motivate, lower-level needs must be satisfied before higher-level needs can become motivators (see further, Maslow, AH (2022) A Theory of Human Motivation, Wilder Publications).

In the hierarchy of human needs, next to ‘physical survival’, the greatest need
of a human being is ‘psychological survival’, i.e. to be understood, affirmed,
validated, appreciated, and treated with respect and dignity.

“Appreciate their point of view. Understand it. It is very important to appreciate the way they see it. Even if you don’t agree, say that it merits serious consideration. Don’t say that they are wrong. Appreciate their self-esteem. Acknowledge that the other person has been heard. Be prepared to argue their case better than they can before you reply.”

(The late Professor Roger Fisher in a two-hour conversation with the author in his study at Harvard Law School during a research visit as a Scholar from King’s College London to Harvard University in April 2002).

When you listen to a person with empathy, you give them ‘psychological oxygen’. By affirming their vital psychological need for understanding and acknowledgement, you can then move forward by becoming partners in jointly solving a shared problem. When you listen with empathy you open yourself up to being influenced. Being open to influence is the key to influencing others. Just as you can now see a problem through the other P’s eyes, so can P2 see the problem through P1’s eyes. This opens the door to the creation of synergy by acknowledging, exploring and exploiting the interdependence paradigm, see ‘Hidden value’ above. Thus, when parties in dispute sincerely and deeply understand each other, then they can open a hidden door to creative settlement in mediation. That is because their ‘differences’ have been transformed from being obstacles to communication and progress, into ‘stepping-stones’ to synergy. In other words, the MAs can help their lay clients to set themselves free from the past, by working together to bring about a better future.’

[Extract about Mediation Advocacy from the 2nd Edition of the Contentious Probate Handbook (2025)].

The 2nd Edition of the ‘Contentious Probate Handbook’, is published in print by the Law Society of England and Wales. The Law is stated as at 1 September 2024. You can order the book using one of the following links:

– https://www.wildy.com/isbn/9781784462345/contentious-probate-handbook-practice-and-precedents-paperback-38-cd-rom-law-society-publishing. NB Wildy’s deliver worldwide.
– https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contentious-Probate-Handbook-Practice-Precedents/dp/1784462349
– https://bookshop.lawsociety.org.uk/p/contentious-probate-hand-2nd-edition-paperback

My next live Zoom webinar to be presented to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide in 2025 is entitled ‘Mediation Advocacy in the Tax-Efficient Settlement of Inheritance Act, Beneficial Interest & Proprietary Estoppel Claims.’

This is provisionally scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday 20 November 2025.

The working title of my next book is ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes – Anachronism, Orientalism, Culture, Ethics & Law’ – See the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk

In August 2026 I am also planning to launch a YouTube Channel – ‘Art and Civilization.’ See www.artandcivilization.tv.

I have obtained permission to change the title of my talk to members of the SCMA worldwide on 20 November 2025 to – ‘Mediation Advocacy in the Tax-Efficient Settlement of Inheritance Act, Beneficial Interest & Proprietary Estoppel Claims.’

The working title of my next book is ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes – Anachronism, Orientalism, Culture, Ethics & Law’ – See the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

This will be written as both a multi-disciplinary academic course text book for Law Students, and as a handbook for Mediators and Mediation Advocates – globally. To view the current chapter structure, please visit the ‘International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk. I have already started work on the book, and will be able to devote all of my available free time to it, after I have written the article above. That is likely to be from September 2025 onwards.

In August 2026, I am also planning to launch a YouTube Channel – ‘Art and Civilization.’ For more information, Google – www.artandcivilization.tv.

Although the ‘Art and Civilization’ and ‘Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes’ projects are personally very close to my heart, I felt that I had to close the circle of writing I have undertaken and talks I have given, over the last 4 years about Mediation and Mediation Advocacy (i.e. facilitated negotiation) in Trust and Estate Disputes, by tackling Mediation Advocacy in the principal forms of claim associated with Contentious Probate.

Inheritance Act, Beneficial Interest and Proprietary Estoppel Claims are not Contentious Probate Claims, but are often brought as part of a complex multiple, and sometimes ‘kitchen-sink’, claim scenario. Throw tax-efficient settlement into the negotiation mix, and the result is a series of practical challenges for both Mediators and Mediation Advocates about which, as far as I am aware, nobody has yet presented a talk.

So, be prepared to have both your eyes opened wide and your imagination stretched, because for the amateur and the unwary, both Mediation and Mediation Advocacy in these disputes, is potentially a mine-field. That of course is both a challenge and an opportunity!