In this study, I have examined creativity in mediated agreements from judicial mediation in the land consolidation court. I have sought to examine to what extent mediation agreements can be characterized as «creative». I have analyzed 122 mediated agreements from cases regarding clarification of boundaries and rights settled in 2016 and 2017, and compared the outcomes with the parties’ original claims to determine whether the agreement can be considered as creative. If the agreement contained one or more substantial elements that were not a part of the original legal claims, it is characterized as creative. I have devised a creativity scale and found that approximately half of the cases contained one or more creative elements. Within the creative settlements, three-quarters contained two or more creative elements. Few settlements contained only one creative element. In average, the settlements contained 1.75 creative elements with a standard deviation of 2.4. Exploring the content of the creative elements, I have found that 75% of the creative elements can be categorized as content regarding rearrangement of land and rights, and «other legal content». Few creative elements can be characterized as content regarding clarification of boundaries.

Keywords: Land consolidation, court-connected mediation, creativity, legal agreements