Alternative Dispute Resolution and Tribunals 2.9

Alternative dispuite resolution. Other methods of resolving a case without going to court

Mediation

Arbatraition

Negotiation

Concilliation

Because in courts you can become enemies with the other party - Whereas with ADR, matters can be discussed in a calmer way

Technical experts - Instead of Judges

Courts can be too inflexible and have strict rules, whereas ADR allowd alot more flexibility and a talierd solution

ADR cases a private, therefore there is no publicity of the case whih could be seen as an advantage to a company that doesnt want to spoil it's reputation 

This is simply when two parties negotiate between eachother prior to court action. A settlement can be reached at any time. 

Arbitrator chosen by both parties along with a date, time and a venue of hearing

Solution imposed on parties by the arbitrator who could be an expert in the feild of dispute

Held in private - Less formal

Advantages - Cheap, speedy, less formal and private

Disadvantages - Can be costlyl, appeal is to courts, limited right of appeal 

Parties seen seperately by and independant mediator who is usually an edxpert in the relevant feild of dispute

Mediator encourages the parties to talk and come to a solution that works for both parties

Used frequently in Family Law (Suzan)

Advantages - Parties reach a good solution, legally bnding

Disadvantages - Time consuming because parties are seen seperately, not always legally binding 

Parties seen together around the table by an independant concilliator who is again usually an expert in the field of dispute

Concilliator plays a more active role in helping the parties to reach a conclusion. May also suggest solutions/ conclusions

Used typically in business disputes

Advantages - Parties seen together, speedy, concilliators active role 

Disadvantages - Relationships of the parties could suffer

Tribunals run alongside the courts
Not stricly another form of ADR but are another alternative to court action

Name a well known example of a tribunal:
Employment tribunal 

• Less formal and specialise in certain areas of law
• Follow principles of Natural Justice and like the courts both parties have a fair hearing
• Make impartial desicions 
  
  

  What does each tribunal consists of?
  A legally trained chairperson
  2 Lay people who have the expertise in the relevant area 

Deal with disputes and matters of discipline within particular proffessions such as trade unions and the medical and legal proffessions

The desicions of domestic tribunals are based on the rules of the organisation concerened 

Appeal to ordinary courts 

The Franks Committee: Tribunals should be OPEN, FAIR and IMPARTIAL

Openess - hearings to be public (reasons and desicions explained)

Fariness - Clear porcedures so parties know their rights

Impartiality - Free from influence from the Government 

The Leggatt Report: OPEN, FAIR and IMPARTIAL 

Proposed methods to gauge fairness - independance from sponsors ect...

Tier system

Chambers set up in First Tier
Chambers set up in Upper Tier 

Advantages - Cost, speed, informality, flexibility, specialisation, privacy, relives congestion in courts

Disadvantages - Lack of openess, NO state funding