Advantages And Disadvantages Of Maritime Arbitration

Arbitration is the submission of a disputed matter to an impartial person (the arbitrator) for decision. Arbitration is typically an out-of-court method for resolving a dispute. The arbitrator controls the process, will listen to both sides and make a decision. Like a trial, only one side will prevail. Unlike a trial, appeal rights are limited.

The arbitration method consists of the selection of an impartial third party called an arbitrator that will hear and decide on the dispute. In the case of AMF v. Brunswick the ruling was that the parties were required to seek arbitration for their dispute.

It is promoted as an avenue to resolve disputes efficiently. Arbitration avoids hostility. Parties in arbitration are more likely than not to work peacefully rather than inflate malice against each other. It is a much cheaper option to litigation, especially when the arbitrator chosen is a non-lawyer. It is conducted in a much quicker process, saving much time and stress on both parties in the long run. Scheduling for arbitration is flexible, and can be decided on by the parties rather than fitting in a schedule convenient for the courts. Rules of evidence and procedure are much more simple and lenient. Most importantly, arbitration is handled privately, with no information being released to the public unlike court

Negotiation, mediation, and arbitration are all forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that are alternatives that organizations use to avoid litigation in court.  According to Valenti Law, negotiation and mediation are forms of non-binding ADR, while arbitration is a binding ADR (2011).  Since arbitration is a binding ADR, the arbitrator’s decisions are legally binding and cannot be challenged by either party in the arbitration.  “There are limited grounds for challenging the decision” (Valenti Law, 2011).

Arbitration is a method to submit a resolution in an arbitral, rather than a judicial forum. For non-labor issues, arbitration can be a less expensive solution. One example is The Home Owners ' Warranty program. A program which aimed to resolve disputes between homeowners and builders. The program was designed between the Home Owners ' Warranty programs of the National Association of Home Builders. This program started in 1973 as a method of formally resolving disputes through arbitration. The program provided a warranty program, using mediation, and arbitration to resolve differences. Before the warranty program was created, the National Association of Home Builders came to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service for advice and assistance on dealing with homeowner disputes. Over the years, the program has expanded across the country through the Magnuson-Moss Bill, assisting the Federal Trade Commission on issuing rules on warranty’s and guaranties. The arbitration occurs while looking at the evidence of a dispute objectively for the best solutions (Barrett, 1985, p. 32).

After carefully considering the situation in both plaintiff (Eunice) and defendant (RFYL), arbitration should be an effective Alternative Dispute Resolution in

According to Walsh (2013), “arbitration, is like a neutral third party (the arbitrator) functions more like a private judge. Arbitrators hear disputes and render decisions that are almost, always final and binding on the parties. Arbitration has, for decades, been the principal means of enforcing employee rights under collective bargaining agreements in unionized workplaces.”

Arbitration has existed in America for centuries. The Native American Indian tribes were believed to have used arbitral process to settle disputes between the tribe and those outside the tribe. “Long before the white man ever arrived in what is now the United States early Native American tribes used arbitration as not only a means to resolve disputes within the tribe but also as a means to resolve disputes between different tribes”. (laborstudies and research p.2). The concept arbitration with no doubt extended to the America from the European continent, largely from England, after she colonizing America. Arbitration among merchants were common, since it proved more efficient and effective that the courts during that period. The first US

Arbitration. Arbitration is the process where a neutral person (arbitrator) first hears out agreements and evidence from both parties and then decides the outcome. The ADR is significant in solving disputes between worker’s union and employers (Radulescu, 2012).

2. Arbitration also involves the help of a neutral third party. Amid mediation, an "authority" demonstrations a bit comparable to a trial judge by listening to the gatherings' grievances. Not at all like an arbiter, is an authority, not a latent go-between facilitator. In the wake of listening to the gatherings, a mediator (regularly an expert in the gathering's subject of the question) really maintains a choice. Mediation is still less formal than an out and out trial on the grounds that numerous guidelines of proof don't make a difference to discretion. The assertion can either be tying or

Arbitration is used by many companies to resolve complex resolutions without the use of formal courtrooms. "Arbitration is becoming more common in human resources disputes" (Fallon & McConnell, n.d.). Arbitrations help to resolve a conflict between two parties who cannot agree. Arbitrators do not have opinions regarding the information presented on both sides. It gives the opportunity for both parties to bring valuable information to the table knowing and feeling the outcome will be justifiable. Arbitration is also more cost-effective for the company and the worker, and the results are much faster usually within a few weeks as compared to years if handled through the court system.

With all of these acts and statutes being passed, it seemed as though arbitration was the way to go. But as more and more agreements to arbitrate future disputes were executed, other nonarbitral forms of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and neutral fact-finding became common.

Arbitration is legal technique used to resolve any disputes outside of the courts. Arbitration allows for speedy and cheap resolution of any disputes, the parties involved in a dispute agree to appoint a third person (arbitrator) who will hear their testimonies, and look into the evidence they provide. The arbitrator's decision cannot be challenged in a law court as it is considered final and the parties involved have to accept the decision (Brams & Merrill, 1986). There are only very limited circumstances where the decision of an arbitrator can be challenged, and this is mostly if there can be proof from one of the parties showing that the arbitrator was biased in their decision or ruling. The chosen arbitrator will be an experienced person in the area of the dispute.

The reason I chose Customs Union as my topic is to learn more about how members or potential members of a union establish an agreement that benefit all parties. I find it interesting that members of a union are able to influence one another’s economic growth, competition and how they can complement one another as well. Having a common trade policy among a group of members and removing all barriers of trade can play a significant role in the success of a business. It saves a lot money, and could be a competitive advantage over competitors. Countries of a union joining can also impact its position in a global market, as well as help the country economically. The ability for a group of countries to come together and help each other is fascinating, and is why I chose to explore this topic more.

International commercial arbitration is one of the most important legal institutions in international private law. This conclusion follows from the fact that the nature of arbitration depends largely on autonomy of the parties, who choose arbitration procedure as the procedure in which the dispute will be settled; place where the arbitration is to be held; arbitral tribunal etc. Probably the most important and considerable expression of the autonomy is the right to choose the law, which is to be applied to merits of the dispute. The chosen applicable law guarantees in large measure predictability of the outcome of the case and allows parties to control the scope of interpretation and application of the international commercial