The institute of mediation is one of the alternative ways to resolve disputes. In the recent times, alternative / out-of-court dispute resolution methods are increasingly mentioned as a form of improvement and facilitation in obtaining legal aid. Classical court proceedings are long-lasting and economically burdensome for all subjects. Although mediation has not reached its full potential in Europe, moves are significant. In this regard, the European Union has issued a series of recommendations and directives related to both mediation and alternative dispute resolution. Most important directives are: Directive 2008/52 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters and Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No. 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22 / EC. Although important, they were not enough and for that reason the European Union adopted a decree, as the act of the highest legal force in the European Union binding on all member states. The European Parliament and Council Regulation on online consumer dispute was adopted in 2013. In the upcoming time, it is just about to see how it will be applied and how much it will improve the online mediation process. In the territory of the Republic of Croatia, the mediation institute is standardized by the Law on Mediation, after which the concept of conciliation as a form of peaceful settlement of disputes entered into the Civil Procedure Act, the Family Law and the Labor Law. The procedure is considered to be international / cross-border if it involves one or more cross- border elements. For example, one or all foreign nationals or nationals who regularly reside abroad, the contract is signed abroad or the obligations of the parties must be fulfilled in a foreign country. Particularly emphasized special areas in which mediation proceedings are used in cross-border disputes are family cases and consumer disputes. There are two areas of mediation in which it is exceptionally recognized as a useful and beneficial method, but we must not delay the fact that these are completely different procedures that require significant differences in the form and manner of addressing the dispute. Namely, due to the efficiency, economic components and speeds of the process, consumer disputes correspond to dispute settlement systems using mediation principles because they are mostly low-value procedures and are almost entirely devoid of any kind of emotion and depth that would complicate the process. On the other hand, the paper deals with the process of mediation in family proceedings where its depth, hidden feelings, needs and emotions provide complexity and interestingness. Interestingness that arises from real everyday family situations that are not harmless and which in almost all cases carry a dose of danger because it is extremely complicated to lead mediation between parties whose emotions are charged with negative connotations. A strong dose of negative connotations is found in cases related to international abduction of children. On international abduction of children applies the provisions of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of October 25, 1980, which applies in all countries of the world that are signatories to it. According to the principles of the Convention on International Child Abduction, Council Regulation (EC) No. 2201/2003 on jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No. 1347/2000, better known as: Brussels II bis, which applies only to the territory of the European Union. Regardless of the area where it is concluded, settlement as the final product of the cross-border mediation process is useless if it is not recognized and enforced in another country. According to Article 6 of the Mediation Directive, Member State's must ensure that the contents of a written agreement resulting from mediation with the consent of the parties may be enforced. This requires the content of the agreement not to be in contravention of the law and to be enforced under the law of the member state in which the request is filed. The Mediation Directive leaves the choice of competent institutions (court or other competent authority) and the form (judgment, decision or authentic instrument) to member states. Thus, if the mediation process ends with a mediation agreement in front the court, it is considered enforceable by national rules and it is considered to be executive in the country in which an action is to be reached by settlement. According to Article 58 of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction, Recognition and Enforcement of Judicial Decisions in Civil and Commercial Matters, an award confirmed by a court in the course of proceedings and enforceable in the member state in which it is achieved, is enforceable in the member state in which it is required to be enforced under the same conditions as if it were an authentic document.