Skip to content


Neutral Evaluation

GIDI neutral evaluation is a swift, early, effective and accessible route to obtain an independent and confidential advice and assistance with a wide range of issues, whether they have reached the stage of dispute or simply for strategy and planning purposes.

GIDI offers a panel of experts in commercial, industry-specific and legal areas who can advise and assist by working with our clients to understand the issue on which they require advice or guidance and provide practicable solutions.

GIDI neutral evaluation differs from GIDI conciliation, mediation or arbitration in that it is not a conflict resolution process involving both sides of a dispute and is not directed at achieving an agreement to resolve a dispute.

GIDI neutral evaluation is focussed on a single party, whether private individual or corporate or international organisation, that requires a confidential independent opinion and advice on how to strategise or plan a successful outcome to a particular situation. It may well be that no dispute has arisen.

GIDI experts advise on a wide variety of matters including  IT, IP, commerce, shipping, construction, corporate and international regulations and relations. We advise at the earliest stage when the creation of a business or legal relationship is anticipated through to the execution and any possible dispute that may arise.

In keeping with GIDI’s particular expertise in cross-border and international matters GIDI neutral evaluators will always focus on solutions that anticipate issues that may arise from different commercial and cultural practices and the resolution of potential resulting problems. This includes early preparation for doing business in other jurisdictions and ensuring that local law and regulation and business practices are anticipated and prepared for.

Procedures and costs

In order to enquire about GIDI neutral evaluation, the procedure and costs please apply to GIDI.

Example A
  1. GIDI was consulted by a leading Chinese electronics manufacturer about its sponsorship of a world-famous EU institution. This institution had received much public criticism and was being investigated by its local Financial regulators.
  2. The Chinese company was in a difficult position because the goodwill and publicity that had led it to enter into this sponsorship was now devalued and was actually causing reputational damage.
  3. The Chinese company wanted some redress and was considering cancelling the contract but did not want to create adverse publicity for itself. It regarded these matters as confidential. It was also wary of the substantial legal fees that can be incurred in litigation in the EU.
  4. It requested GIDI neutral evaluation to examine the possibilities. GIDI was swiftly able to prepare a factual brief covering the circumstances in both China and the EU institution. The factual analysis revealed that the Chinese company had various options including ones that could be pursued privately in confidence.
  5. Having agreed the facts and a course of action with the Chinese company, GIDI proceeded to identify and instruct an appropriate local EU law firm. This law firm was given precise instructions by GIDI as to what the client wish to achieve and a strategy note was developed between the law firm and GIDI. This was presented to the Chinese client who agreed the strategy which was then put into action.
  6. GIDI participated with the local law firm in drafting private correspondence which was sent to the EU institution who immediately accepted complaint about the reduced value of the contract and agreed to reduce the fees. All of this was done in complete confidence and the working relationship between the Chinese company in the EU institution was maintained and productive going forward.
  7. This was achieved by GIDI neutral evaluation skills and facilities in collaboration with a local law firm and the clients objectives were fulfilled swiftly and for very modest fees. Importantly, this process can be carried out confidentially and the working relationship with the other party to the dispute can be repaired and maintained. The identities of the parties involved have been anonymized.
Example B
  1. A Hong Kong company that had acted as agent and facilitated a substantial services contract between the EU services provider and a Far East oil producer complained to GIDI that the success of its role was not being acknowledged and it has not been paid.
  2. The fee in question was under $200,000. GIDI was immediately able to analyse the factual situation and draw attention to the fact that it is very difficult to litigate in the EU for such a small sum in the light of the law firm costs in the EU.
  3. GIDI produced a factual analysis of what facts and evidence would be required to establish the claim in order that this could be submitted to an appropriate law firm. On the basis of this analysis GIDI collaborated with a law firm in order to establish which countries might have jurisdiction over the claim and how it could be formulated.
  4. GIDI was able to facilitate a strategy for the HKSAR company swiftly and economically in order to enable it to take a strategic decision on how to pursue it claim.
  5. In addition to collaborating with an appropriate law firm on the potential claim and correspondence GIDI was able to recommend a proposal for mediation and of the GIDI mediation roles (which will be conducted by a fresh and impartial GIDI mediator) and which would provide the possibility of a swift an economic resolution to the dispute. It would also be confidential.
  6. GIDI was able to point out that any such agreement and settlement reached in mediation could be converted into an arbitration agreement under the rules of GIDI and would be enforceable in the courts of the EU.




It is the mission of GIDI to respond to all enquiries within 48 hours.