1. There are 4 main types of ADR; they are Negotiation, Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. For the negotiationNEGOTIAION, 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.
2. Conciliation 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.
3. Mediation 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. 4. The last type of ADR is the ARBITRATIONarbitration.
It is the most formal type of ADR. And there are two types of arbitration, they are paper-based and face-to-face hearing. For the paper-based method, both parties in dispute complete written submissions to the arbitrator concerning their issues. 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'.
The award is binding on both parties and can be enforced or even challenged in the courts. This method of arbitration is commonly used in holiday dispute and commercial dispute. By using arbitration, parties can set their own timetable and control cost by halting proceedings. Also, it is very private during arbitration. It is not very formal but some rules are quit strict. No appeal is allowed and the decision imposed and binding. 5. For the civil courts proceeding, there are three different tracks; small-claim track, fast track and multi-track.
In the SMALL-CLAIM TRACKsmall-claim track, it has a maximum financial limit of i?? 5,000. Such cases are heard on a more informal basis by a district judge and usually take place in a committee room, rather than in a courtroom. The time set aside for such hearings is usually an hour or less, and the judge gives a decision at the end of the session. At the end of the case, the winner is not awarded his/her own costs against the unsuccessful party. 6. In the FAST TRACTfast track, it is used for claims between i?? 5,000 and i?? 15,000.
Cases are strictly timetabled by the judge and should be heard within 30 weeks of the claim formally being made against the defendant. 7. For the MULTI-TRACKmulti-track, it deals with claims exceeding i?? 15,000, and can be heard by either the County Court or the High Court, depending on the value and the degree of legal complexity of the case. The judge exercises case-management, involving pre-trial hearings between the parties and the laying down of a timetable to bring the case to court. 8. In the past, lot of people usually took legal action to resolve their dispute.
However, apart from own legal fee, the failing party would usually be required to bear the winning party's legal fee. And not all winning party's fee would be reimbursed by the failing party in accordance with order. The actual winner was their lawyers. 9. Professor Hazel Genn did a research on peoples' reactions to breaches of the civil law. In his research, he found that 95% of people take actions to resolve a justiciable civil dispute. 5% do not take action, and among the 5%, there are high percentage on low incomes and poor educational qualifications.
In the 95% of people who take action to resolve a justiciable civil dispute, 34% of them settle the matter by agreement, 14% settle through a court or tribunal, and the rest of the percentage of people have no resolution reached and the case abandoned. From the research, it tells us that, the role of courts in resolving civil disputes is relatively small. 10. After ADR schemes have been endorsed by Lord Woolf's civil justice reforms, parties are encouraged to take ADR to resolve their dispute. Apparently, a lot of people will consider the following to compare and contrast the ADR and the Court before taking legal action.