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

Authors Avatar

Compare and contrast ADR with the court.

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

There are 4 main types of ADR; they are Negotiation, Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. For the negotiation, 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.

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.

Join now!

Mediation is the only type of ADR that involves an independent, neutral third party acting as a go-between, trying to get the parties to talk through what each side wants and negotiate a mutually beneficial compromise. And the mediator does not offer any opinion. It is commonly used in family dispute. By using mediation services, parties can set their own timetable and control the cost by halting proceedings. There is no appeal but can abandon mediation at any time.

The last type of ADR is the arbitration. It is the most formal type of ADR. And there are two types ...

This is a preview of the whole essay