More handpicked essays just for you.
Advantages and disadvantages of alternative dispute resolution
Advantages and disadvantages of alternative dispute resolution
Advantages and disadvantages of alternative dispute resolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) involves dispute resolution processes and techniques that fall outside of the government judicial process. There has been moves against ADR in the past by entities of many political parties and their associates, despite this, ADR has gained inclusive acceptance among both the broad community and the legal profession in past years. In fact, many courts now entail some parties to remedy to ADR of some type, usually mediation, before allowing the parties' cases to be tried. The increasing attractiveness of ADR can be clarified by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to obtain larger control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute.
ADR holds an extensive, easily influenced and diverging choice of processes for finding solutions for disputes which are personified by structured negotiation and consensus. It is regarded that arbitration is a familiar ADR technique, however, it is a more of a official adjudicative and adversary technique initially a confidential litigation process which has more commonality to litigation than the more original consensual processes which symbolise ADR. As simplified by Angyal (Alternative Dispute Resolution, 1987, p. 11):
"The key difference between ADR and those traditional techniques of litigation and arbitration is that ADR techniques are used to produce a resolution to dispute through a negotiated agreement while litigation and arbitration are processes by which a result is imposed on the parties."
We can say that many issues arise with terms. A past Chief Justice of Supreme Court of New South Wales and one of Australia's powerful proponents of ADR, named Sir Laurence Street, has commented that:
" It is not in truth Alternative'/ It is not in Competition with the established judical system. It is an Additional range of mechanisms within the overall aggregated mechanisms for the resolution of disputes. Nothing can be alternative to the Sovereign in the discharge of the responsibility of resolving disputes between state and citizen or between citizen and citizen. WE can however, accommodate mechanisms which operate as additional or subsidiary processes in the discharge of sovereign's responsibility. These enable the court system to devote its precious time and resources to the more solemn task of administering justice in the name of sovereign." (Street, The language of alternative dispute resolution' (1992) 66 Australian Law Journal, 194)
In 1977, Nils Christie wrote the essay, “Conflicts as Properties”, in which he discusses the four problems that occur within the western legal system. The four problems that affect the legal system in four ways is that the courts are always located in areas that people may not have easy access to locate, the courthouses are challenging to find your way around, the parties are irrelevant to much of the proceedings and the proceedings makes conflicts between the actual parties involved turn into conflicts between the State and the parties 2.
Ulrich, G. (1999). Widening the circle: Adapting traditional Indian dispute resolution methods to implement alternative dispute resolution and restorative justice in modern communities. Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy. 20, (2), 419-452.
He explains that when a conflict arises, we are less capable to take on the situation and are more likely to hand it off to authorities. He then comes to the conclusion of how they are overlooked, in terms of importance, and that individuals own their conflicts as one would own property. Furthermore, he justifies that these properties are stolen by law, therefore, no longer owned by individuals. Christie urges the need to eliminate ‘professionals’ from the sphere of conflict resolution in order to prevent the theft of conflicts. He explains his perspective of “conflict as property” as not relating to material compensation but rather to the ownership of conflict itself. He then recognizes the effects of victim losing the “property” originally, and puts forth a fix for this process. He introduces a way to remodel the justice system for dealing with conflicts in which the court is victim
They are additional jurisdictions in the court of appeal under the act and the commonwealth
There are many different areas of law that require practice. Perhaps one of the most exciting areas of law is civil litigation. There are many different kinds of litigation that fall
H W R Wade ‘The Basis of Legal Sovereignty’ (1995) 172 Cambridge Law Journal 186.
(1)If, during arbitral proceedings, the parties settle the dispute, the arbitral tribunal shall terminate the proceedings and, if requested by the parties and not objected to by the arbitral tribunal, record the settlement in the form of an arbitral award on agreed terms.
contractual term that is included in a wide variety of agreements between two or more parties. This clause demands that any disputes that arise between these parties out of contracts or transactions be settled through an arbitration proceeding"(1) Arbitration is a form of ADR, Alternative Dispute Resolution, that is an alternaitve to a trial by jury. Instead of a judge deciding in favor of one of the parties during litigation, an arbitrator is able to make a legally binding decision. Arbitration was designed to be more beneficial to both parties over litigation as it's faster, cheaper, has
Journal of Dispute Resolution, 401-427.
The fundamental purpose of the requirement that an originating process (“OP”) be served by personal service, prior to the commencement of proceedings, is to promote procedural fairness and natural justice . This essay will examine personal service in the context of civil procedure and the governing procedural rules pertaining to the personal service of an OP in New South Wales , as outlined in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) ("UCPR"). To avoid doubt, unless the context indicates otherwise, “defendant” and “claim” shall include the singular and the plural as an OP may comprise of multiple defendants and/or multiple claims.
The three types of disputes that adjudication reasolves are: Disputes between private parties, such as individuals or corporations ,Disputes between private parties and public officials, Disputes between public officials or public bodies.
Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR refers to a number of various processes that can be used to resolve legal disputes other than by litigation. Recently, methods of dispute resolution which focus on arbitration, mediation and negotiation as an alternative to adjudication have gained notoriety. This notoriety may have been caused by the public perception that ADR methods are less expensive, more efficient, and more satisfactory than the normal traditional course of litigation. The goals of establishing these processes to resolve disputes as an alternative to more formal legal processes include: 1) to make the regular court system more efficient, less costly and more responsive to the needs of the litigants; 2) to offer alternative methods of dispute resolution in addition to the regular court system; and 3) to provide public education about the available alternatives.
The Civil Procedure Rules recognised in Wales and England imposes a positive duty on the court to encourage parties to use an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures if the court considers it appropriate, from the forgoing it could be inferred that achieving unbiased and objective dispute resolution is no longer the exclusive claim of the adversarial legal process as hitherto claimed by liberal societies. In addition, exact practices of adversarial legal system scarcely exist, since the daily life of court now involves routine departures from its original fundamental ideals. Nonetheless, growing evidence depict that mediated outcomes are more likely to be complied with than court decrees contrary to the position of pro adversarial advocates.
Both forms of ADR have several common characteristics. However, one must consider that a neutral side in both procedures fulfils distinct from one another duties. Mediators do not have the objective to make decision, whereas arbitrators determine an outcome of the case. Upon the termination of the procedure, an arbiter renders a binding award that cannot be later avoided by disputants. During mediation, parties are not contingent upon the third side and enjoy freedom of actions needed for dispute resolution. In contrast, in case of failure to reach an agreement, parties are not legally bound for actions afterwards. By considering the true qualities of arbitration and mediation taken individually, legislation and scientists suggest that in single arbitration, arbitrators may use mediators’ functions to promote amicable settlement and functions of both arbitrators and mediators have incongruous
...sfied with the outcome and resolution from the mediation session, the parties are given liberties to engage with a court procedure.