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

The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Extracts from this document...


The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) (question 1a) Introduction "Discourage litigation. Persuade neighbours to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often the real loser - in fees, expenses, and a waste of time." (Abraham Lincoln, July 1850) This statement gives the main reason for ADRs' creation which is to limit the amount of money and time spent on dispute resolution whenever it's possible, by avoiding litigation. Thus, ADRs are meant to be a relatively quick and cheap way to settle conflicts. They are a real alternative to litigation in Civil Courts. 1) The different types of ADR The four main ADRs are arbitration, conciliation, mediation and ombudsmen. * In mediation, the parties with the dispute meet in a neutral place, and an impartial third party, the mediator, helps them to reach an agreement. To do so, the mediator can ask questions to both parties letting them use the answers to agree on a solution (he does not interfere in the decision-making process). This kind of mediation is called "facilitative mediation". The mediator can also make some suggestions about the possible solutions to the dispute. This kind of mediation is called "evaluative mediation". However, in both cases, the final decision is made solely by the parties involved in the conflict and the remedies agreed are not restricted to the ones a Court could order. ...read more.


In fact, the law must have been taken into consideration during the decision-making process, but the arbitrator may also rely on his experience and reasonableness. * Ombudsmen deal with complaints against organisations or government bodies such as the NHS, in an impartial way. They are specialised, e.g., complaints about the NHS are taken care of by the Health Service Ombudsman, complaints about solicitors are taken care of by the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors, etc. Their role is to conduct some specific investigation (depending on the claim) in the organisation or government body, and order or recommend remedies if they think the person complaining suffered an injustice. They can also ask the organisation to review a particular aspect of its system if the investigation conducted have proven the system to be inefficient, or if several similar complaints have reached the Ombudsman. All ombudsmen don't have the same power, and decisions made by ombudsmen are not always binding. There are also other types of ADRs, such as "adjudication", "expert determination" and "early neutral evaluation". In these three cases, the parties agree to choose an independent third party (usually a lawyer or an expert in the field) to either issue a binding decision (e.g., in adjudication or in expert determination) ...read more.


The parties may prefer to refer their dispute to a specialist in the subject field and may therefore opt for an ADR which allows them to choose an expert third party to resolve (or help them resolve) their disagreement, e.g., in adjudication, expert determination, early neutral evaluation and in private arbitration. * In litigation, the parties are forced to attend the deliberation process at a time and place decided by the Court, which might not be convenient for them and discourage them from taking the dispute to the Court. ADRs can secure the settlement of their dispute without disturbing too much the parties' individual lives. * Overall, ADRs are usually cheaper than litigation which allows people with limited means to have access to justice. For this reason, ADRs are also suitable for small claims as the amount at stake can be smaller than the cost of litigation. * ADRs may provide a wider range of remedies (more informal) than litigation, e.g., an apology, a change in behaviour/policy/procedure, a new agreement, etc. * Finally, the use of ADRs has had the effect of relieving the courts congestion, making the civil justice system slightly quicker. Conclusion ADRs make access to justice easier mainly because of their flexibility and their capacity to adapt to specific cases. They can be a good alternative to litigation if there is no time boundary in bringing the case to the Courts, e.g., in employment cases. ...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)

    Therefore, arbitration hearings can take many forms. The parties can decide on a paper arbitration, which means the parties submit everything to the arbitrator in writing, who will then read everything and make a decision. However the parties can also have a hearing at which they appear and give evidence and witnesses may be called.

  2. Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay

    There are many forms of the procedure, which is left to the parties to decide, such as giving documents to the arbitrator so he/she can make a decision, giving oral submissions to the arbitrator, using witnesses if necessary.

  1. A critical evaluation of labelling theory.

    Secondary deviance however results from the attitudes of those around the offender to his or her actions. If they label the offender a deviant and stereotype them then this often serves to make the offender accept themselves as a deviant and go on to form a new life around this label.

  2. Disputes - Is ADR always more appropriate or does attending court sometimes providing a ...

    The arbitrator considers both sides' arguments and provides a written decision to the parties. For the face-to-face hearing method, it is similar to, though less formal than a court appearance. Both parties give their submissions and the arbitrator decides the outcome, called the 'award'.

  1. Alternative dispute resolution. Alternative methods for resolving such disputes have developed, or been ...

    The speed of alternative methods to court is a lot faster than the court process, and you are able to decide when you want to try and find a resolution to your dispute, which means you do not necessarily have to take time out of work, which you may have

  2. Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution

    The arbitrator may be freely chosen by both parties. An ?Institute of Arbitrators? exists, which can provide trained arbitrators for disputes. If they cannot agree the court will select a suitable arbitrator. Usually, there is one sole arbitrator but more may be chosen.

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

    Hence it is popular in divorce cases and commercial disputes. The advantages in mediation are that it is facilitative and evaluative. Issues can be defined and mediators will not take part in the decision making process. When mediation is successful, it is written down to form a legally binding contract.

  2. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    Concurrent Evidence In New South Wales in Australia the system of concurrent evidence is used when two or more parties wish to call upon experts to testify upon the same or a similar topic. This has is now used as the main approach to giving evidence in the New South

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