Abstract Unlike litigation and arbitration, mediation is a more informal way to settle disputes. The process has been considered to be quick, cheap and interest-based and it is said to promote amicable settlements. Yet mediation is not commonly used as a dispute resolution method in Sweden today. However, mediation as a dispute resolution method is promoted by the EU institutions and the European Parliament and the Council has adopted a directive which will secure that the EU citizens, in some cases, will have the possibility to choose extrajudicial mediation as a dispute resolution method. Until now, it has not been possible for parties to immediately seek enforcement of the content of a Swedish extrajudicial mediation settlement agreement. However, the directive will also ensure that the EU Member States provide the EU citizens with such enforcement possibilities. According to the wording of the directive, the request of enforcement will require all parties' explicit consent. This means, that if such consent is not given, the content of the agreement cannot be made enforceable. The uncertainty whether such consent will begiven in the end of the process or not may contribute to people waiving to initiate a mediation process because the actual outcome of the process could be difficult to predict. For the mediation process to be considered as an equivalent way to settle disputes to the e.g. litigation proceeding, it is necessary that the parties also experience the results of the processes as equivalent. The requirement of consent is not totally abandoned in the proposed Swedish Mediation Act by which the directive shall be implemented. Instead of choosing the wording of the directive, there are other perspectives on the matter of enforcement which the Swedish legislature perhaps could be inspired by when implementing the directive.