Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay

The purpose of this paper is to discuss what Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is and how it
came about, what different types of ADR there is to choose from and how ADR benefits both parties
compared to litigation. ADR can quickly resolve almost any minor issue regarding most civil cases
family, neighbors, employers, contractors, etc. ADR includesmediation (also known as conciliation),
arbitration and settlement conferences. Some of the benefits of ADR include cost, speed,
confidentiality, control, cooperative resolution and industry experts.
Brief History of ADR ADR has been around for many years but has really taken off over the past
few decades specifically after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. In the Civil Rights...show
more content...
It also will show the corporation that you are serious about the issue. Lastly, it can expose the
corporation to increased public scrutiny as your case gains access to evidence. Listed on this same
site were con's of litigation. Litigation can create a damaging precedent if you lose, making it harder
for other communities to defend themselves against the offense in question. It can also be very
costly and use up resources, both financial and personal, that could have been used in other ways.
Not to mention that litigation can heighten conflict, making it more difficult to repair relationships
with in the community later on.
Types of ADR
Mediation
Mediation is one of the most common types of ADR and is also known as conciliation. In
mediation, a mediator (neutral) is assigned to the dispute and helps the two parties mutually reach a
resolution and the session is entirely voluntarily. According to TheFreeDictionary.com by Fairflex,
the mediation typically starts with the mediator defining what exactly will happen during the
session, where and when the sessions will occur and will execute a formal confidentiality
agreement. In the second meeting the two parties will share what the dispute is and what they
would like to see as resolution. This gives the chance for the two parties to get a chance to see the
other side of the dispute. Sometimes this action alone the two parties could come to a resolution and
skip to
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Essay on Alternative Dispute Resolution
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Recently there have been many moves to encourage the use of ADR, this eases the burden on the
judicial system and helps both sides in theory come to a reasonable settlement without the costs of a
court case. The term ADR can be described as
Г…Вё Dispute resolution procedures utilized outside of court
In order to ensure
Г…Вё Cost effective litigation
And to
Г…Вё Help prevent litigation reaching the courts
Litigation itself has a number of drawbacks as a way of solving civil disputes; it does not
necessarily always lead to the best result for both sides
Г…Вё It is expensive and slow; it also gives a clear advantage to the wealthier party who afford
...show more content...
SCOPE OF PROCESS– The process is unstructured, voluntary and is non–binding.
OUTCOME
Ideally: a mutually acceptable agreement based on shared interests; Realistically: Varies from
Win–Win to Lose–Lose
Negotiation continues even after court proceedings have been commenced. The Lawyers will
continue to negotiate on behalf of their clients right up to the trial. Many cases are solved literally at
the door of court. This situation is something that the other methods of ADR try to avoid.
2. Mediation
DEFINITION– This is a private, voluntary process in which a neutral person (mediator) helps
communication between the warring parties to help promote a settlement
NEUTRAL INVOLVED The impartial third party selected by parties to assist in issues causing
frictions between the parties. The Mediator is expected to generate options, and arrange a mutually
acceptable agreement for both parties

ROLE OF LAWYERS–Lawyers may present case, although parties usually communicate directly;
they may assist clients regarding any problems of clarification of legal issues.
ROLE OF PARTIES–The parties are able to reveal their true feelings, give their side of the story and
negotiate directly with the opponents. They can also participate in creative problem solving
hopefully leading to earlier settlement.
SCOPE OF PROCESS–The process is flexible as it is

Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay
Resolution in the courts is not the only method of dispute resolution. If the parties can resolve their
own differences then there would be no need to use the court system which would benefit all
parties being the claimant, defence and the civil justice service. Although the court service is a
good and fair way of dealing with civil disputes in might not be the ideal way in getting the best
result for both the parties. There are four main ways of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) they are;
Negotiation, Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration (also known as a Formal Settlement Conference
or mini–trial).
Negotiation is a method whereby the two parties try to...show more content...
The opposition party can then give their stance and any reasoning for the dispute. Each party can
then suggest a resolution and barter for an agreement suiting both parties. Negotiation fundamentally
allows both parties to get their story off their chests in a non–hostile environment in an effort to
understand each others opinion.
Mediation is similar to the above method of negotiation with the exception that it also involves a
third person. This person is completely neutral and is called the mediator. The mediator will
consult with both the parties privately at a place and time agreed by everyone. He/she will take
down all key points of both arguments and will attempt to seek 'common ground' between parties
which the mediator will discuss conclusively with them together and on a agreed date. The
purpose of the mediator is to give a basis to both parties from which to begin discussion to form a
resolution. The mediators purpose is not suggest an overall solution to the problem being
discussed, but is to develop the areas of discussion and to make sure that the full story has been
heard and understood by both sides. The only way mediation can be successful is if both the parties
are wanting an agreement to come out of the process.

Alternative Dispute Resolution ( Adr )
SHOULD PARLIAMENT PASS A LAW TO MAKE IT COMPULSORY FOR PARTIES TO A
DISPUTE TO USE ADR BEFORE THEY GO TO THE COURT?
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is the term used to describe the resolution of disputes inside or
outside the legal system, without formal adjudication. It includes arbitration, mediation, conciliation
and negotiation. There are problems associated with going to court. These include the adversarial
process used to find a winner and loser, which often creates stress for, and increases the division
between litigants. The advantages associated with the use of ADR have prompted a debate whether
Parliament should make it compulsory for all litigants to first use ADR before they go to court to
seek solutions to their differences.
Legislation and court procedures have demonstrated recently how ADR is important in resolving
disputes. 'The commercial Court released a practice statement in 1993, showing that it wished to
encourage ADR, and followed this in 1996 with a further direction directing judges to consider
whether a case is suitable for ADR at its outset, and to invite the parties to attempt a neutral
non–court settlement of their disputes'. The pre–action protocols state that parties should take
reasonable steps to apply the directions given in order to make a claim. Failure to apply these
pre–action measures may result in not being paid the stipulated costs at the end of the case. 'Rule
1.4(2)(e) of the CPR states that the court must encourage the parties

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is any method or means of resolving or settling disputes,
which is carried out outside the courtroom and is not litigation. The courts are however at times
requested to the ADR methods used in solving disputes. ADR is usually carried out in a number of
ways. The common ways of ADR include negotiations, arbitrations, mediations, early neutral
evaluations, and conciliations. Over the years, ADR has become very common and have been
adopted by many people around the world especially owing to the fact that they eliminate the long
queues at the courts and the high costs charged for litigation process by the lawyers who mainly
have the interest of making themselves money besides helping their clients with the case . ADR
programs can either be voluntary or mandatory depending on the state and the agreements of the
state and the lawmakers of the state.
Arbitration and Meditation
Arbitration and Meditation are the two most common methods of ADR. Negotiations, on the other
hand, are usually attempted as the first method of dispute resolution by most individuals or people
who find themselves amidst conflicts. Negotiations, however, do not work very well as in most
cases the involved parties tend to disagree due to self–interests. The advantage of Negotiation is
however that it gives the two parties a chance to meet, control the resolution process and solution
without necessarily involving other outside parties .
On the hand, in Mediation a

This essay will provide a detailed examination of what Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is,
particularly mediation, the various techniques of ADR, the advantages and disadvantages of ADR;
and whether or not courts should have the authority to compel individuals into undertaking
mediation or other forms of ADR. This essay argues against courts having the power to compel
litigants into mediation but may be afforded powers to encourage parties to go through mediation at
first instance. This essay will base its arguments on whether courts should compel civil litigants to
follow the ADR route upon the perceived advantages of ADR and its success rate. The contention of
this essay is not that mediation is inappropriately used to settle...show more content...
Nevertheless, certain categories of ADR have been named and understood to involve the use of
particular means and methods to produce the desired end result. These procedures include:
negotiation, mediation, arbitration, med–arb, early neutral evaluation, settlement conference and
conciliation to name a few. However this essay will concentrate on mediation as a form of
alternative dispute resolution.
A potential advantage of ADR is that because parties voluntarily involve themselves in the process,
and in most cases agree to the outcome there is rarely a difficulty with enforcement. Enforcement is
a much greater potential problem of litigation where a party who has lost in court may be unwilling
to meet judgement. At the same time, individuals have pointed to the advantages of the type of
settlement which could be achieved by ADR over the costly and divisive nature of litigation.
Nonetheless ADR also has its disadvantages, according to Fiss "ADR implicitly asks us to assume a
rough equality between the contending parties", but notes that in truth settlement "is also a function
of the resources available to each party to finance the litigation, and those resources are frequently
distributed unequally", here Fiss argues that the ADR process does not measure the unequal nature
of the parties and that in some cases this inequality may bring about

Alternative Dispute Resolution, Or ' Adr '
Alternative Dispute Resolution, or 'ADR ' is the phrase used to describe the different methods of
ways to resolve legal disputes outside of the court system. There are many advantages and
disadvantages to it, and they come in many different forms in England and Wales. These include
administrative tribunals, arbitration, mediation, adjudication, conciliation, negotiation, expert
determination and the ombudsmen services.
Administrative Tribunals come in many different forms and can cover many areas including
employment tribunals, lands tribunals and rent tribunals. The most common one being employment
tribunals. The distinction between Tribunals and the Courts have sometimes be blurred because it
has long been held that tribunals are just an administrative extension to the Court system and
therefore some argue that Tribunals are not a separate entity, "There is some debate as to whether
tribunals are merely part of the machinery of administration of particular projects or whether their
function is the distinct one of adjudication,"1 However the main difference between tribunals and
the courts is that tribunals are much more specialised in nature, coming in many forms, some of
which are stated above. Administrative tribunals are also not staffed by judges, and are staffed be
specialists in the particular field in which the administrative tribunal is being held. For example, an
employment tribunal would be chaired by a panel of people who specialise in employment law.

INTRODUCTION
Alternate dispute resolution or ADR (commonly called in Australia) is a procedure by which
parties in dispute can settle their differences with third parties or any outside source other than the
courts. It is a collective effort by which all the parties can settle disputes with or without any
outside sources like litigation procedures or courts. In simple words it can be said ADR is a
procedure to settle disputes without resorting to the use of litigation or courts. These procedures are
generally less costly affair than courts and litigations and are also much more expeditious. ADR is
now extensively being used around the world to settle land disputes and commercial disputes.
Alternate dispute resolution can be carried out...show more content...
In the decade of 1980's and 1990's many people became concerned by the fact that legal procedures
like litigation and court became too expensive for resolving disputes. They were also concerned
about the fact that litigation and court matters became too time consuming and cumbersome for
many lawsuits. This concern gave rise to finding alternative ways to settle disputes among parties
rather than approaching courts or litigations and this gave rise to alternate dispute resolution (ADR).
Arbitration –
Arbitration is a type of alternate dispute resolution which is used to settle disputes outside of
litigation courts. In simple words it can said arbitration is where all parties who are in dispute
approach an arbitral tribunal or an arbitrator for settling their disputes. In countries like England
and United States of America, arbitration is a very widely used technique in the cases of consumer
and employment disputes and related matters. Parties who chose the path of Arbitration for
settlement of their disputes should agree to abide by the decision which the arbitral tribunal comes
up with. There can be a third party who reviews and imposes decisions which are legally binding
and enforceable by the court and litigation. In arbitration only limited number of appeals and rights
to review are available for the interested parties.
Arbitration can be voluntary or mandatory as well as it can be binding and non–binding as well.
Non binding arbitration is very

Question–01
Alternative Dispute Resolution is an increasingly accepted option that allows people to resolve
disputes outside of court in a helpful manner. ADR can be faster, cheaper and less stressful than
going to court. Most essentially, the use of ADR can provide greater fulfillment with the way
disputes are resolved.
Purpose of ADR
Reduce costs of the arbitration process to reduce overcrowding in the courts.
Create a speedier and more efficient forum in which to resolve the civil disputes.
Alternative Dispute Resolution refers settling disputes outside of the courtroom. ADR typically
includes early neutral evaluation, negotiation, conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. As burgeoning
court queues, rising costs of litigation, and time delays continue to plague litigants, more states have
begun experimenting with ADR programs. Some of these programs are voluntary others are
mandatory.
The two most common forms of ADR are arbitration and mediation, negotiation is almost always
attempted first to resolve a dispute. It is the preeminent mode of dispute resolution. Negotiation
allows the parties to meet in order to settle a dispute. The main advantage of this form of dispute
settlement is that it allows the parties themselves to control the process and the solution.
Mediation is also an informal alternative to litigation. Mediators are individuals trained in
negotiations, which bring opposing parties together and attempt to work out a settlement or
agreement that both

Alternative Dispute Resolutions: Arbitration Clause
Saundra Stewart
Kaplan University
LS311–01: Business Law 1
Professor James Starcher
May 1, 2012
Disputes, disagreements, differing opinions, and arguments, what do they all have in common?
They all involve two persons or groups that have different ideas that are in conflict with the other.
When these differences arise we as a civilized society usually are able to work out some solution
that may work to the benefit of both parties. This process of resolving these conflicts is called
Dispute Resolution.
There are three basic categories of Dispute Resolution that are often used: 1) Negotiation; 2)
Mediation; And 3) Arbitration. Negotiation is the process where the two parties will...show more
content...
This process does not stop as we grow older. As we age our life experiences have great input on how
our decision making process works and what values, beliefs, and standards that we seek to uphold.
The actions that occur as a result of our thinking process can be considered Ethics. In essence,
Ethics is a study of our actions that can be considered right or wrong behavior. (Miller, 2012, p. 61)
Business Ethics is the study of the decisions we make in the business environment and whether or
not those decisions are good or bad.
Two schools of thought are primary to Ethics and how we subscribe or view them. The first
school is considered Outcome based Ethics. This school of thought is also referred to as
Utilitarianism. The basic premise is that the end result of the action or decision justifies the action
or decision that was made or taken. Another way of putting it is that the ends justify the means.
(Miller, 2012, p. 64) The second school of thought is considered Duty based Ethics. Duty Based
Ethics is often based on religious percepts or philosophical reasoning. On the religious precepts, one
example would be the Christian used of the 10 commandments. Christianity bases its code of conduct
and behavior on these 10 rudimentary principles for living and dealing with others. The
philosophical approach was put

Alternative Dispute Resolution In Court Cases
An Alternative Dispute Resolution not only is beneficial in the fact that it's a less expensive
procedure in comparison to filing for a lawsuit but also because it offers a process that is considered
to be less time consuming. A court system that enforces a plaintiff to have an
Alternative Dispute Resolution before proceeding with their lawsuit in court would benefit both the
plaintiff and court system tremendously. This new enforcement of having an Alternative
Dispute Resolution would give plaintiffs the luxury of not having to deal with all the hassles of
having to go to court. Also, plaintiffs wouldn't have to worry about all the expenses associated with
having to pay lawyers, especially if their cases were to be strung out due to over flow

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights expresses that everybody ought to have
compelling access to the courts. This does not infer that parties included in a dispute can 't choose to
resolve their dispute out of court in an alternative way, provided that they both consent to do so and
there is some type of legitimate control. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) involves all
components for determining lawful question without turning to litigation, for example arbitration and
mediation.
Arbitration
Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution in which parties involved in a dispute exhibit
their confirmation to an unbiased "judge" in a casual setting. Once the gatherings have unreservedly
consented to submit a dispute to arbitration, a party can 't singularly withdraw from the discretion.
After considering all evidence, the judge renders a choice, an alleged arbitral award. Arbitration is
utilized generally as a part in conflicts in the middle of organizations and has various advantages
over court trials. The disputing parties can get a speedy choice and determination of their dipute at a
much lower cost than through court processes. An arbitration hearing is typically not open to people
in general, though court incidents are regularly open to the general population and news media. It
can choose a referee who has broad legitimate and useful involvement in the particular accurate and
legitimate issues in

Consider carefully the facts of the case study and advise Eagle
Aviation Ltd. and Aircraft Ltd. of the alternatives to litigation in the ordinary courts and the
advantages and disadvantages of each alternative form of ADR.
This submission will identify and define each form of Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) including each of the forms advantages and disadvantages. It will also
compare and contrast each form of ADR and consider which form or forms would be beneficial to
both Eagle
Aviation Ltd and Aircraft Ltd
Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR can be defined as "any method of resolving a legal problem
without resorting to the legal process"
(Darbyshire, 2001). ADR is now becoming...show more content...
Section 33 of the AA states that an Arbitration Tribunal has a duty to "act fairly and impartially
between the parties, giving each a reasonable opportunity to state their case; and to adopt procedures
suitable for the circumstances of the case, avoiding unnecessary delay or expense" (Slapper and
Kelly,
2003) An Arbitrator can make a decision based on one of two ways, the first being made using any
supporting documents given by the parties involved to assist their case and secondly by holding a
hearing where both sides can present their case themselves .
Arbitrators can also decide whether the parties involved can be legally represented, they also have
the power to call in expert witnesses and can visit sites outside of the hearing room. A court can
retract an Arbitrators decision if it feels that the Arbitrator has not acted fairly or impartially
towards one or both parties, they do not hold the relevant or required qualifications or is not of a
suitable mental or physical capacity to deal with the proceedings accordingly. The majority of
contracts between businesses now include what is known as an Arbitration Clause, this is when
parties agree that any future disputes that may occur will be submitted to

The Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution
Alternative methods of dispute resolution (ADR) are methods of resolving a dispute without
resorting to using the courts. The fundamental principles of Alternative Dispute Resolutions are
Negotiation, Tribunals, Conciliation, Arbitration andMediation. Many of these approaches include
the use of a neutral individual such as a mediator who can assist disputing parties in resolving their
disagreements. The use of these methods helps in bringing justice to all people concerned with civil
matters.
The most obvious and most cost effective way of resolving disputes is by negotiation. It is where
the two parties get together and discuss the points of...show more content...
As the mediator is a neutral member of the party, their views are not generally taken into account
and this helps because this way the mediator can be seen to show no bias to either side. However,
sometimes the opinion of the mediator can be taken simply to resolve the matter; in this case, the
mediation becomes more of an evaluation exercise.
The main disadvantage of using mediation is that there is no guarantee the matter will be resolved,
and it will be essential to go to court after a failed attempt at it. In such situations, additional cost and
delay result from trying mediation. Another disadvantage of using mediation is that it cannot set
precedents for future cases, unlike the courts, since each matter using mediation is seen to be based
on the individual rights and wrongs of the case. Though matters are not set in precedent, they can be
referred to in order to settle the dispute more steadfastly.
Conciliation is similar to mediation, as a neutral third party helps to resolve the dispute. The main
difference is that a conciliator will suggest a compromise and sometimes the settlement between the
parties and generally play a more active role. The method of conciliation is often questioned as, due
to the more active role, the conciliator can become biased towards a certain party. The use of a
conciliator

Within the first part of my essay alternative dispute resolution (ADR) will be examined. I will have
a critical look at the key types as well as their usefulness in fulfilling the objective of access to
justice.
ADR represents a variety of processes all aiming to resolve disputes between potential litigants out
of court. The parties agree on the type of process used and the independent third party. The main
reason for adopting ADR, however, is dissatisfaction with litigation. Especially after the introduction
of new issue fees that came into force on January 4th , many people are deterred from bringing their
disputes to court by the financial barriers.
Colin Ettinger, President of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, describes...show more
content...
A further advantage is the high settlement rate and that the parties normally keep to mediated
agreements, as they have constructively worked on it rather than have a decision imposed on them.
(Data source: http://adrr.com/adr3/other.htm).
The mediator 's decision is non–binding (except when it is signed) and in the case of a failed
mediation, court, tribunals or other ADR options can be the following steps.
However, this can be a disadvantage because a failing mediation and the following measures can be
very time–consuming.
Conciliation has some overlaps with mediation but the conciliator takes a more active role in leading
the parties to a consensus of opinion. The disputants do not usually meet; the conciliator conducts
discussions separately with each party before he gives guidance on settling the dispute. His opinion
then forms the basis of an agreement. The parties are free to agree on this. Concerning employment
disputes, sometimes the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) suggests that
disputes should be settled by means of conciliation. If the process is successful, mediation and
conciliation are good examples for overcoming the problems of litigation and facilitating the ease of
access to justice.
Nevertheless, the non–binding agreement is the first essential problem of both mediation and
conciliation because a solution is no use when one party does not accept it. The second problem is
that, in the absence of a third

Introduction
Since litigation particularly in High Court is both expensive, time consuming and also the
disadvantage of process being conducted to the public. Different parties with disputes have sought
after other means of dispute resolution which is generally known as alternative dispute resolution
(ADR).
Alternative dispute resolution is basically a way of solving civil dispute. It is the collective term for
the ways that parties settle civil disputes, with the assistance of an autonomous third party and
without the need of a court hearing which often leads to a mutual understanding between both
parties. In situations where mediation does not decide the case, a variety of other options which
includes conciliation, arbitration, adjudication and private judging which is a rare option of ADR.
Regardless of the historic opposition to ADR by many parties and their advocates, ADR has since
gained widespread acceptance among both the public and the legal profession in contemporary
years. In addition to this, courts now advice some parties to resort to ADR which includes
mediation before approving the parties' cases to be tried in court. The first practical use of alternative
dispute resolution procedures began in the 1970s as a possible way for the disabling court backlogs
and also a way to resolve environmental and natural resource disputes. In 1985, the Attorney General
issued a directive identifying the need for ADR to drastically reduce the time and cost of litigation.

Dispute Resolution Processes Essay
Dispute Resolution Processes
Wherever there is a human–interaction, conflict is virtually unpreventable. For–instance, some
conflict may well erupt a dispute in any structure of relationships, and other perhaps resulting in
extremely compound international confrontation and hostility.
It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem (G. K. Chesterton).
Consequently, dispute resolution processes have been developed to manage and intervene in these
types of disputes. The result is a highly diverse field in which conflict mediation professionals and
other private nonprofit organization take on a broad array of roles. This research paper defines
some of the different roles established in the dispute...show more content...
The mediator may not render a decision.
Arbitration
In arbitration, a neutral third party is empowered by the parties to decide the outcome of a dispute.
Of all the methods of alternative dispute resolution, arbitration most closely resembles standard legal
proceedings.
There are two types of arbitration: binding and non–binding. In binding arbitration, the parties agree
to waive their right to go to court for a judicial decision. In non–binding arbitration, the parties have
the discretion to abide by the arbitrator's decision.
Other Dispute Resolution Processes
There is a spectrum of dispute resolution processes, ranging from informal discussion to formal
adjudication. The concept behind the development of alternative dispute resolution, or "ADR," is
that the traditional adjudicatory model of dispute resolution is not always the best approach. Rather,
the concept has developed that "the forum should fit the fuss," and not vice versa.
With time, ADR has come to have a new meaning, "appropriate dispute resolution." In light of the
rapid growth of collaborative negotiation, mediation and other settlement processes, there is, in fact,
nothing alternative at all about ADR today. We are finding collaborative negotiation and mediation
processes adopted with increasing frequency in legal, governmental, business and family matters.
There are no limits to the types of dispute

Within the Australian justice system, Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms (ADR) have
historically been perceived as a means whereby parties can seek to resolve a variety of disputes, but
in a non–judicial manner. As we move further into the 21st century, the rising costs associated with
lengthy and often ineffective litigation, accompanied with a need to reduce burdens placed upon our
legal system have allowed for a notable shift away from the courts as the primary means of dispute
resolution, with a growing number of parties preferring ADR as the most appropriate means to
bring about a more cooperative approach to legal matters. In the past, it has been largely up to the
parties to identify the issues that are in dispute, which would then later be adjudicated in the
appropriate court. Many scholars have strongly advocated in favour of adopting pre action
requirements, whereby parties are encouraged to negotiate disputes prior to the commencement of
litigation. Lord Wolff in his 1996 report into the UK justice system importantly notes that "the
present system... is too expensive in that the costs often exceed the value of the claim; too slow in
bringing cases to a conclusion and too unequal: there is a lack of equality between the powerful,
wealthy litigant and the under–resourced litigant". His recommendations, alongside several others
have been given significant weight within Australia, with the Attorney General initiating the National

alternative dispute resolution Essay
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;...show more content...
The first Uniform Arbitration Act was adopted in 1925, which provided only for the irrevocability of
agreements to arbitrate existing disputes. The Federal Arbitration Act was enacted by Congress in
1925 changing the common law. The Act stated that written agreements to arbitrate existing or future
disputes were valid, irrevocable, and enforceable. As arbitration became more widely accepted,
statutes and acts were continuously passed enforcing agreements to arbitrate. In 1955, the second
Uniform Arbitration Act was passed. In addition to enforcing existing agreements to arbitrate, this
Act made agreements to arbitrate future disputes irrevocable.
From this brief history of ADR provisions, it is easy to see the widespread acceptance of ADR in
more recent times compared to the hostility that courts expressed toward it early on. The trend of
acceptance spread, and in May of 1986, forty–five states had enacted statutes similar to the second
Uniform Arbitration Act, enforcing agreements to arbitrate future disputes.
With all of these acts and statutes being passed, it seemed as though arbitration was the way to go.
But as more and more agreements to arbitrate future disputes were executed, other nonarbitral forms
of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and neutral fact–finding became common.
An agreement to mediate future disputes means that the parties want to present their side to a
mediator, a third party who is neutral. This mediator's

Noura Elfallal
2. When considering mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), there are several
advantages relative to other forms of (ADR) such as courts and arbitration. Mediation is the process
where a neutral party facilitates the negotiation between two opposing parties to help resolve the
problem out side of the court system. The advantages of using mediation are as follows: it is a rapid
low cost process, the parties (not a judge) decides the outcome, and the process is without risk
(non–binding agreement). Meaning if both parties cannot reach an agreement that is a mutually
satisfactory outcome, they can then resort to litigation. Mediation is the simplest form of ADR,
where the negotiation process is conducted with a single mediator who does not judge the case but
simply helps facilitate the discussion in the hopes of reaching a resolution suitable for both parties.
Subsequently, if mediation does not work and both parties leave mediation someone else will make
the decision for them either an arbitrator or a judge. In doing so, both parties will be giving up their
decision making power. Arbitration results in a win–lose decision made by the third party that
oversees the process and the decision made is final and a binding agreement. Litigation is a costly,
prolonged, emotionally draining, unpredictable, and results in a win–lose decision made by a judge.
The Typical stages of mediation are as follows: Introduction (opening statement), statement

Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay

Similar to Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay (9)

More from Help Me Write My Essay Cambridge

More from Help Me Write My Essay Cambridge (18)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay