Alternative Dispute Resolution Mindmap

Mindmap detailing all you need to know for alternative dispute resolution including negotiation, mediation, conciliation and arbitration. Includes advantages and disadvantages for each.

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: GeorgeB16
  • Created on: 12-12-15 12:06
View mindmap
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Negotiation
      • Very informal. Parties negotiate directly between themselves. Often the 1st step in resolving a dispute.
      • Can be in the form of a text, phone call, email, etc. Completely private and fastest and cheapest method. Solicitor can argue on your behalf and draw a legally binding contract.
      • Advantages: Completely private; Quick and cheap; Flexible.
      • Disadvantages: Can take a long time which Woolf tried to avoid; Possible imbalance between parties; Other forms of ADR may be needed; No legal aid or appeals.
    • Mediation
      • Informal and involves a neutral 3rd party (mediator) assisting disputing parties to reach an agreement. Acts as a go between to facilitate cooperation and agreement.
      • Often used in family disputes (family mediation), no need for a legal expert. Voluntary - all parties feel in control with mediator moving between both.
      • Not appropriate if parties are entrenched and agreement is not legally binding unless drawn up by a lawyer - more money.
      • Advantages: Voluntary; Saves time and money; reflects interests so equal and fair; relationships of the parties is preserved; actively encourage by Civil Procedure Rules; Retain the right to go to court.
      • Disadvantages: Not legally binding; Not good if entrenched; No access to legal aid; Lack of expertise; Too informal
    • Conciliation
      • Very similar to mediation. Conciliator makes offers and counter offers w/out getting involved in the dispute. This method is used to get a specific outcome.
      • Okay if entrenched - parties kept separate. Conciliator simply shuttles back and forth. Time and date set to suit parties and outcome is not binding. Used by businesses using ACAS - deals with employment disputes. Conciliator offers non binding opinion.
      • Advantages: Legal expert; Private; Reserve the right to go to court; Flexible; Works when entrenched; Cheaper than court; Informal.
      • Disadvantages: Not legally binding; No decision guaranteed; No legal aid or appeals; Too informal and flexible.
    • Arbitration
      • "Privatised Litigation". Favoured by commercial world and trade unions. Governed by Arbitration Act 1996 and S1 states arbitration should be without delay, expense and to do it fairly, with no intervention from courts. Impartial - parties free to decide case how they want.
      • Carried out by arbitrator and procedures they follow laid out in AA96. Not compelling however most attend with agreement in writing. Some commercial contracts include Scott v Avery Clause compelling parties to attend if dispute arises. Expected to be a legal expert in required field. Accordance with stipulated rules and in a judicial manner - formal. Parties able to choose arbitrator but arbitrator has final say.
      • Initial meeting = preliminary meeting. Arbitrator tries to achieve consensus so they can issue a consent order to reduce risk of later challenging in court. Fixed date and time is set to suit the parties and dispute can either be resolved or come to some understanding.
      • Advantages: Flexible; Can choose arbitrator; Private but reserve the right to go to court; Cheap, easy and quick - no delays; Scott v Avery Clause.
      • Disadvantages: No appeals; Professional arbitrators are expensive; If legal expert not used, process isn't fair; Too flexible so too long to get resolution.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Civil courts and ADR resources »