In leui of the rituals and competitive nature of trial court alternative dispute resolution strategies have been thriving over the previous decades. The main camps of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are called arbitration and mediation.
Arbitration is comperable to trial court in its competitive nature, but it lacks a lot of the formalities, and tends to save a considerable amount of time and money. During the course of the settlement process parties present their cases to the arbitrator in a corresponding way that they would a judge.
In arbitration, the entire process is generally far less formal than in trial court, but the principle remains the same- WIN. Make no mistakes, arbitration is competitive. Once the arbitrator hears and considers the cases s/he makes a verdict based mostly on the evidence presented, and hopefully, a thorough knowledge of the law. The arbitrator applies the law to the case and decides on an award for one of the parties.
To paraphrase, the arbitrator declares a winner.Mediation, from a different perspective, is cooperative in nature, in contrast to being competitive like trial court and arbitration. Mediation is also casual, as alternative dispute resolution usually is, saving participators time, money, and frequently headache. In the mediation process both sides do present their cases, but the essence of the process is completely different because at the end the mediator does not make any verdict, and there will be no winner.
The job of the mediator is simply to be an impartial third party facilitator of cooperation for the two parties. A good mediator will help the two parties to define the point (s) of argument and pin down the problems that are most crucial to each side. Then, the beauty of the mediation process is that as a team everyone works together to come to a fair compromise which everyone can agree to. The mediation process is only complete when both parties willingly consent to a solution.
Arbitration is comperable to trial court in its competitive nature, but it lacks a lot of the formalities, and tends to save a considerable amount of time and money. During the course of the settlement process parties present their cases to the arbitrator in a corresponding way that they would a judge.
In arbitration, the entire process is generally far less formal than in trial court, but the principle remains the same- WIN. Make no mistakes, arbitration is competitive. Once the arbitrator hears and considers the cases s/he makes a verdict based mostly on the evidence presented, and hopefully, a thorough knowledge of the law. The arbitrator applies the law to the case and decides on an award for one of the parties.
To paraphrase, the arbitrator declares a winner.Mediation, from a different perspective, is cooperative in nature, in contrast to being competitive like trial court and arbitration. Mediation is also casual, as alternative dispute resolution usually is, saving participators time, money, and frequently headache. In the mediation process both sides do present their cases, but the essence of the process is completely different because at the end the mediator does not make any verdict, and there will be no winner.
The job of the mediator is simply to be an impartial third party facilitator of cooperation for the two parties. A good mediator will help the two parties to define the point (s) of argument and pin down the problems that are most crucial to each side. Then, the beauty of the mediation process is that as a team everyone works together to come to a fair compromise which everyone can agree to. The mediation process is only complete when both parties willingly consent to a solution.
About the Author:
In arbitration you can either have an arbitrator or a complete arbitration panel for the hearing. Likewise, in mediation you can either use one mediator or a whole mediation panel for your hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment