Mediating in the Age of AI: Why Global Regulation Matters

Understanding how AI rules differ—and why it matters for your practice

By Roxana Payano, MBA

Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator

Founder, Beacon Mediation Services

AI is everywhere now—from contract review software to chatbot-driven intake forms. It’s reshaping how we practice law, mediate disputes, and deliver services. But while the tools are evolving quickly, the rules around them are not keeping pace in the same way—and they’re definitely not consistent.

Every country is writing its own script when it comes to AI regulation. Some are strict. Some are flexible. Some focus on collaboration, while others are racing toward innovation without the brakes on. And if you’re using—or planning to use—AI-powered tools in your work as a mediator, attorney, or client, this global patchwork isn’t just an interesting debate. It’s a real-world risk.

Let’s unpack what’s happening.

Across the globe, most governments agree on the same foundational goals for regulating AI: transparency, accountability, and fairness. But that’s where the consensus ends. Each region interprets and enforces those values in dramatically different ways.

In the European Union, AI is being treated like a safety issue. The EU’s sweeping AI Act ranks technologies based on risk—from low-level tools to high-risk systems that require strict oversight. If your AI tool touches areas like biometric surveillance or legal decision-making, you’ll need to meet serious compliance standards—even if your business isn’t based in Europe. If you serve EU users, you’re on the hook.

In contrast, the United States is leaning into speed and innovation. Regulatory efforts that began under the Biden administration have largely been scaled back. Today, the focus is more on maintaining tech dominance than enforcing ethical guardrails. While there’s movement around deepfakes and export controls, most federal oversight remains light-touch—for now.

Then there’s China, which is tightening domestic rules while actively advocating for global coordination. Their government has been vocal about the need to prevent AI from becoming, in their words, “an exclusive game for a few.” At the same time, they’re ramping up their own standards and embedding AI safety protocols directly into national planning.

So what does all this mean for legal professionals and mediators?

It means you have to pay attention. If you’re using AI-assisted tools in your work—whether it’s to analyze case data, draft settlement terms, or support intake processes—you’re stepping into a legal landscape where what’s allowed in one country might be banned in another. And in cross-border cases, that’s not a small risk.

Clients may want to know how an AI tool reached its recommendation. Bias, privacy breaches, or unclear liability can derail a case before it even begins. Explainability becomes more than a nice feature—it’s a professional necessity.

We’re watching a global debate play out in real time. Countries like the U.S. and U.K. are prioritizing innovation. Others, like the EU and China, are leaning into oversight and coordination. At the Paris AI Summit, the divide was obvious. Some governments pushed for collective safety standards, while others declined to commit.

Here’s what that tells us: AI governance isn’t going to be clean and universal anytime soon. And that means professionals in the resolution space—especially those working with international clients—have to lead with clarity.

Know where your tools come from and what regulations apply. Make sure you can explain how they work, especially if outcomes are influenced by AI input. Set boundaries in writing—if clients are using AI in any part of their process, include expectations and responsibilities in your agreements.

Most of all, lead with transparency. That’s what builds trust. Whether you’re guiding a client through mediation or training the next generation of conflict professionals, clarity around how AI is used will set the tone for fairness and credibility.

The technology is here. The laws are coming. But until then, your edge lies in knowing the differences—and using them to protect your process, your clients, and your outcomes.

Roxana Payano, MBA, is a Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator and the founder of Beacon Mediation Services. She advises legal professionals on how to blend AI with conflict resolution practices in a safe, ethical, and forward-thinking way.

To learn more about AI in mediation: info@BeaconMediationServices.com | (321) 247-8269

Evening and weekend availability statewide and online.