Mental Health Review – handles disputes involving mental patients.
The tribunals operate alongside the courts. They are set up by statute and used to resolve certain types of disputes like The Employment Tribunals ACT 1996 deals with all cases involving employment issiues.In some cases a tribunal must be used to resolve disputes before the courts are involved.
A tribunal’s proceedings are inquisitorial rather than adversarial and characterized by openness, fairness and impartiality. The parties can present their case in their own words so they feel they have had a fair hearing.
ADR – This has been described as ‘a collective description of methods of resolving disputes otherwise than through the normal trial process.’ Since Lord Woolf’s reforms, ADR has played a large part in the resolutions of civil cases.Cases that are suitable for ADR include things like family, consumer, commercial and employment. It’s useful where the parties have to carry on an existing relationship i.e. neighbours or businesses.
Negotiation is usually the first type of method to be used.It is the quickest and the fastest and is undertaken in a private and confidential manner.If the matter is proving too difficult to resolve than a third party can be called in to negotiaite on their behalf.
Arbitration is where the parties agree to a third party making a binding decision to resolve the dispute. The Arbitration Act 1996 states that the objective is to obtain a fair and impartial resolution of a dispute without unnecessary delay or expense.
This method is usually used to resolve disputes over commercial contracts, 10,000 of these are heard every year. Many companies state in their contracts that arbitration must be used before any court proceedings are undertaken.. An arbitrator is an independent judicator who is an expert in the chosen field there must be a mutual trust between the parties and respect for the final decision. Their decision is usually final but can be challenged in the courts on the grounds of irregularity.
Arbitration fees are normally high but this is outweighed by the efficiency and speed of the process.
Mediation is another alternative dispute resolution but the parties must be co operative as they are in control.The mediator just acts as a go between for them.He helps them come to a compromise by exploring the needs between the two parties and making offers for them.
This method is becoming more important in divorce cases regarding property and custody as the court route is undesirable as it complicates issues and aggravates the parties. The family law act 1996 made mediation a compulsory part of divorce proceedings. The consequence of this was 4 out of 10 cases were resolved completely before going to court.
Mediation is useful because a mediators fees are around a £1000 compared to litigation which is around £100,000.
The difference between a conciliation and mediation is that a conciliator will usually play a more active role. A successful outcome relies on the skill of the conciliator and the willingness of the parties.Concilliation is less formal than other methods and is used for small issues like noise and car parking of neighbours.
The ACAS (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) offers a conciliation service for industrial disputes. This service is for post office workers and fireman etc. who have been threatened with industrial action.
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using alternative methods of dispute resolution
The main advantages of using alternative methods of dispute resolution are that it is cheaper than a court case as there is no need for legal representation. Disputes are also resolved more quickly which is useful if there needs to be an urgent solution.
ADR also helps keep the parties relationships intact while going to court could destroy them because of the aggressive atmosphere.Court cases can complicate even simple issues.
The procedure for ADR is far less formal which is useful because courts can be daunting for some people. The parties can feel at ease and deal with the case without being intimidated by the civil process.The parties also have more control over their case which can make the party feel their justice has been done.
For businesses ADR is useful because they don’t have to make their confidential information public like in a court and businesses can remain on good terms with each other.
Many disputes are complicated and can be dealt with more effectively by someone who is an expert in that field. A judge may have a general understanding of a case but an arbitrator will have worked on that point of law for many years and therefore can produce a more just decision.
The disadvantages of ADR are that in most cases, public funding is not available making it open to people who can afford it only.It is available on rare occasions.
The lack of legal representation can make the process difficult for a party to cope. This also means one party maybe stronger and dominates the other resulting in a decision that doesn’t fully benefit the weaker party.
The lack of precedent reduces certainty for the parties involved.
Overall the advantages of ADR outweigh the disadvantages simply because people want justice to be done in a cheaper, simpler and quicker way.ADR provides that and takes a lot of cases off the courts so they can deal with more serious ones.
