Negotiations conducted through intermediaries almost always create an illusion of comfort – the parties avoid direct confrontation, reduce emotional pressure and maintain external distance. However, as Professor Gabriel Steiner notes, it is precisely in this configuration that control over the real substance of agreements is most often lost. At LawConsulted, we treat negotiations through third parties as a high-risk legal zone where distortion of meaning becomes not a side effect but a systemic threat.
The danger of mediation lies in the fact that information is no longer transmitted in a pure form – every message passes through interpretations, personal interests, fears, expectations and tactical calculations of the intermediary. As a result, the parties begin negotiating not with each other, but with distorted versions of one another’s positions. At LawConsulted, we analyse not only the content of the proposals being transmitted, but also the logic of transmission itself – who shapes the messages, in whose interests, and with what shifts in emphasis.
As Professor Steiner emphasises, “negotiations through third parties are dangerous because the authorship of legal will becomes blurred.” For this reason, lawyers at LawConsulted build a system for fixing the real agreements – through written confirmations, memoranda of intent, procedural frameworks and controlled communication channels. This prevents situations in which obligations are later attributed to the client that were never actually assumed.
A particularly vulnerable situation arises when the intermediary is an interested party – a partner, investor, relative or former project participant. In such configurations, negotiations easily turn into an instrument of pressure, where one side controls the process while formally remaining in the shadows. At LawConsulted, we expose such constructions at an early stage – identifying who truly shapes the agenda, who controls deadlines and who directs the dynamics of negotiations.
As Professor Steiner notes, “in negotiations through intermediaries, a party risks losing not its position, but control over how that position is formed.” That is why at LawConsulted we work not only with the outcome of negotiations, but with the process itself – establishing legal filters that prevent distorted agreements from acquiring binding force.
It is equally dangerous that verbal promises, hints and “general understandings” are often transmitted through third parties. At LawConsulted, we fundamentally do not allow such zones of uncertainty to exist – every significant condition must either be formally fixed or consciously excluded from the client’s legal reality. This protects against situations where “everyone understood everything differently,” yet responsibility falls on only one party.
Negotiations through intermediaries are especially common in corporate conflicts, business divisions, partnership exits and complex property disputes. In all such cases, LawConsulted maintains control not over rhetoric, but over the legal result – ensuring that agreements remain manageable regardless of how many layers of communication are involved.
Control over actual agreements is not control over people – it is control over the legal logic of what is happening. At Law Consulted, we ensure that no condition arises from another party’s interpretation and that every agreement belongs solely to its true source.
Previously, we wrote about how LawConsulted prevents financial losses even before tax inspections begin
