On October 6, 2026, I led an advanced half-day training session in Paris for the Centre de formation professionnelle à la médiation, à l’arbitrage et à la négociation (a professional training center for mediation, arbitration and negotiation), titled “How to negotiate with ease?”. Each tool was illustrated with a general example, then applied to an international family case. Here are the key takeaways, with selected excerpts from the training materials.
Negotiating easily does not mean negotiating softly
It all starts with the story of the orange. Two sisters argue over the last one and cut it in half: one squeezes the juice and throws away the peel, the other grates the peel and throws away the pulp. A single question, “why do you want it?”, would have given each of them everything. In an international divorce, “I want the children” is a position; “I want to stay present in their daily lives” is an interest, and it opens up several options.
Ease comes from rigorous preparation, a simple method and a confident stance: hard on the substance, soft on the people. I look for an agreement while using litigation as leverage, because everyone then knows what will happen if there is no deal. The method has four steps: prepare, connect, explore, conclude.
Prepare: your BATNA starts with “where to file?”
The core tool is a five-question worksheet: What does the law say? Why does each side have an interest in negotiating? What does my client really want? What does the other party really want? How will we negotiate in practice: lawyer to lawyer, in a four-way meeting, by video, through a participatory procedure (procédure participative), a collaborative process (processus collaboratif) or mediation? You then set three levels of objective and your BATNA, the best alternative to a negotiated agreement (MESORE in French): never sign a deal worse than it, and never reveal it.
In international cases, the BATNA is not “going to court” but which court, in which country, under which law, with what enforcement. A decision that the other country will not recognize is a weak BATNA. Example: two French spouses living abroad can bring their divorce before a French court because they share French nationality (Brussels II ter, art. 3), but absent a choice, their divorce may be governed by the law of their habitual residence (Rome III, art. 8); jointly choosing the applicable law (art. 5) becomes a negotiation item.
When the imbalance is extreme, going to court restores the balance of power: a return application in a child abduction case, a protective measure against the risk of assets being dissipated. With one firm limit: negotiation must never be used to maintain a hold over the other party.
Connect, then explore: from positions to interests
Emotion blocks reason. The negotiator helps the parties climb back down the conflict escalation ladder and takes into account a multiplied frame of reference: two countries, two cultures, two languages, two visions of family. When Alain, in the case study used throughout, says “You want to steal my children!”, nonviolent communication helps him say instead: “When I hear that the children would move to Paris, I am afraid, because I need to stay present in their lives. Can we set a visiting schedule together?” The request becomes negotiable.
Exploration follows principled negotiation: look for the interest behind each position, invent options for mutual gain, rely on objective criteria. Adapted to families, it comes down to one rule: children before money. Every concession calls for something in return (“if… then…”), and ultimatums or stalling tactics are defused by naming them, then returning to the legal analysis.
Conclude: an agreement that holds in each country
An agreement that is not recognized in the other country is a negotiation you will have to start over. Lock in each point, write up a list of agreed points without delay, choose a form of agreement recognized in both countries (the French participatory procedure is unlikely to be recognized abroad), and agree on the applicable law where possible (Rome III; 2007 Hague Protocol).
The closing workshop used a situation invented for the purpose: Alain and Claire, a French couple married under a separation-of-property regime, live in Abidjan with their three children; Claire wants to move back to Paris. The suggested answers started from a shared interest, the children’s stability and their bond with both parents, and from one observation: since both BATNAs were poor, each spouse had an interest in reaching a deal.
Key takeaways
- 1Prepare with five questionsThe law, each side’s interest in negotiating, both parties’ real needs and the practical format of the negotiation.
- 2Know your BATNA, and theirsIn international family cases, it depends on the court seized, the applicable law and recognition of the decision in the other country.
- 3Litigation as leverageGoing to court can restore a lopsided balance of power, but negotiation must never become a tool of control.
- 4Emotions before numbersActive listening, reformulation and nonviolent communication move the discussion from positions to interests.
- 5Children before moneyStart with what unites, finish with what divides, and never concede without something in return.
- 6An agreement recognized in each countryChoose the form of the agreement after checking the private international law of both countries.
Training excerpts
Selected excerpts from the training materials “How to negotiate with ease?” (15 slides). View online; enter your details to download the PDF.
General information. This account of a talk reflects only my personal opinion and is not legal advice. The cases mentioned are fictional, or inspired by real cases, modified and anonymized.