In applying and construing this chapter, consideration should be given to the need to promote uniformity of the law with respect to its subject matter among states that enact it.
§ 9-17-12.Uniformity across jurisdictions
Chapter 17. Georgia Uniform Mediation Act · Last amended 2021 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceO.C.G.A. § 9-17-12 instructs courts applying and construing this chapter to give weight to the goal of keeping Georgia’s mediation law consistent with the versions other states have enacted from the same uniform act.
Full Text of § 9-17-12
Plain-English Summary
Georgia did not draft the Uniform Mediation Act from scratch — it adopted a model act written for many states to use in common. This section reminds courts of that origin. When a court applies or construes any part of Chapter 17, it should weigh the value of keeping Georgia’s reading in step with how other states that adopted the same uniform act read theirs.
The instruction does not bind a Georgia court to follow another state’s interpretation, and it does not override the chapter’s own text where the two conflict. It works as a thumb on the scale — a reminder that counsels against an interpretation that would set Georgia apart for no strong reason, in favor of one that keeps the law working the same way for anyone dealing with mediations that cross state lines.
Clauses like this one appear throughout uniform acts because a patchwork of divergent state interpretations would defeat the purpose of adopting a shared model in the first place. A mediator, attorney, or party operating in more than one state benefits from a mediation privilege that means roughly the same thing wherever it applies.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does this section require Georgia courts to follow other states’ interpretations of the Uniform Mediation Act?
No. It directs courts to give consideration to the goal of uniformity, which is a factor to weigh rather than a binding rule of decision.
Why does this chapter include a uniformity instruction?
Because Chapter 17 derives from a uniform act meant to produce a consistent legal framework across the states that adopt it, and this section keeps that goal in view when courts read the chapter.
Does this section change the meaning of any specific privilege rule in the chapter?
No. It is an interpretive aid for courts applying or construing the chapter generally, not a substantive privilege or disclosure rule of its own.
Who benefits from having Georgia’s mediation law track other states’ versions?
Mediators, attorneys, and parties involved in disputes or mediations that cross state lines, who gain some predictability from a privilege that works the same way in multiple states.
Can this uniformity instruction override the plain text of another Code section in this chapter?
No. It counsels toward interpretations that promote uniformity, but it does not supersede the chapter’s own text.
Amendment History
Code 1981, § 9-17-12, enacted by Ga. L. 2021, p. 646, § 2/SB 234.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, published by the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Georgia Code Revision Commission / LexisNexis. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: georgia uniform mediation act uniformity clauseuniform law construction georgia mediationconsistency with other states mediation law georgia