• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Disputes - Is ADR always more appropriate or does attending court sometimes providing a better solution?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Compare and contrast ADR with the court. Is ADR always more appropriate or does attending court sometimes providing a better solution? 1. There are 4 main types of ADR; they are Negotiation, Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. For the negotiationNEGOTIAION, this is the most informal way of resolving disputes and it is commonplace in everyday life, especially in consumer dispute. The parties agree a solution 'over the fence', without the need for the intervention of lawyers. By using negotiation, the matter can be solved quickly and privately. The parties can set their own timetable and less cost if process close by and shorter. Although there is no appeal allowed for the negotiation, parties can abandon at any time or resort to courts. 2. Conciliation CONCILIATION is similar to mediation, but there is no neutral third party. Instead, there is a conciliator. The conciliator has the power to suggest a resolution and avoid litigation. It is often used is cases of unfair dismissal like employment dispute. Same as negotiation, the parties can set their own timetable and less cost if the process close by and shorter. Also it is very private and informal/ Different from other types of ADR, conciliation dose allow appealing and it can turn to Divorce County Court or appeal to High Court Family Division. ...read more.

Middle

However, apart from own legal fee, the failing party would usually be required to bear the winning party's legal fee. And not all winning party's fee would be reimbursed by the failing party in accordance with order. The actual winner was their lawyers. 9. Professor Hazel Genn did a research on peoples' reactions to breaches of the civil law. In his research, he found that 95% of people take actions to resolve a justiciable civil dispute. 5% do not take action, and among the 5%, there are high percentage on low incomes and poor educational qualifications. In the 95% of people who take action to resolve a justiciable civil dispute, 34% of them settle the matter by agreement, 14% settle through a court or tribunal, and the rest of the percentage of people have no resolution reached and the case abandoned. From the research, it tells us that, the role of courts in resolving civil disputes is relatively small. 10. After ADR schemes have been endorsed by Lord Woolf's civil justice reforms, parties are encouraged to take ADR to resolve their dispute. Apparently, a lot of people will consider the following to compare and contrast the ADR and the Court before taking legal action. ...read more.

Conclusion

So ADR is always more appropriate than attending to a court. 12. However, on the following situations, sometimes parties will choose to attend the Court to seek an order for solution (1) The action relates to "Scandalous or vexatious, initiated or prosecuted maliciously, ulterior motive or oppressive manner". (2) The attitude of the party (a) Views himself / herself as a hero fighting against hostile forces. The other party is seen as evil, unjustified and illegitimate. (b) Views himself / herself as doing something righteous to uphold principles of a higher order. The other party is viewed as immoral. (c) View himself / herself as a detective trying to reveal the self-serving motives of the other party. 13. As the aim of ADR is to facilitate settlement, the endorsement of Lord Woolf on ADR, can lead us go towards a better legal environment. So I am of the view that ADR is always more appropriate than attending to a court. (1) Professional fee: ADR usually borne by both parties on equal share but costs of litigation is usually borne by failing party. It means that apart from own legal costs, failing party has to bear winning party's legal fee. And although winning party's fee ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is the name given to the process where parties in ...

    5 star(s)

    Court proceedings create a winner and a loser. Using ADR to settle a dispute means businesses can remain on good terms and continue to trade with each other once their dispute is resolved. Costs to the Parties as all forms of ADR are far cheaper than taking a case to court.

  2. Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay

    will affect the overall outcome of the case, if the parties can't control the case then it will also be difficult to come to agreements, if the barristers and lawyers are speaking on their behalf their own 'lay' opinions may be overlooked despite the fact that they are clearly just as vital if not moreso.

  1. Conditional Fee Arrangements and Legal Aid

    Consequently they challenged the fairness of the UK proceedings in the European Court of Human Rights, which was successful, as the defendants had not been given a fair trial. Overall, conditional fee arrangements have more disadvantages tied to them, however it has meant that there is a greater access to

  2. Woolf Reforms

    The most significant innovation of the reforms is case management; the court will now be the active manager of the litigation. The main aim of this approach is to bring cases to trial quickly and efficiently. The court now has to allocate each case to the most appropriate track depending primarily on the financial value of the claim.

  1. The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

    ADRs can therefore be preferable in some cases where the "big tool" of litigation in a Civil Court doesn't seem proportionate to the conflict to resolve, e.g., family and neighbours problems, etc. In fact, the new Civil Procedure Rules encourage courts to order ADRs when it's deemed appropriate and a

  2. Alternative Dispute Resolution refers to methods of resolving disputes without going to court.

    This may be common in holiday packages under the ?Scott v Avery? clause. The decision made can then be enforced by courts. There are several advantages in arbitration such as the flexibility and the informality of the procedure where parties can choose the location, arbitrator(s)

  1. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    This should help to prevent the situation that seems to have happened in many of the miscarriages of justice where the jury immediately takes the experts testimony as fact. Another option available to the court is to have the experts be sworn in one after another, with each of them

  2. The English Court System

    However, in some circumstances, Divisional Court hearings may be held before a single judge. These circumstances can includes, motions in the Divisional Court, including motions for leave to appeal; urgent or expedited matters; appeals from a final order of a master or case management master; or appeals from a final order made in Small Claims Court.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work