Arbitration Act

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.

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).

Mediation happens when a 3rd party comes in and helps improve the relationship, enhances communication, and uses effective problem solving techniques. Administrative or managerial approaches and procedures are used if conflict is between employees or members of an organization. The 3rd party, doing the mediation is allowed to make a decision if need be. This approach reminds me of how the military handles conflict within their ranks. Being in the military I have seen this process being conducted, they will allow the parties to try to resolve their own conflict, but if they cannot the authority figure does it for them. Arbitration is a private process still including a 3rd party that helps resolve the conflict. Arbitration comes in two forms med-arb and mediation then arbitration. Med-arb uses mediation as the first step to resolve the conflict, if mediation does not work they move on to arbitration, while the mediation then arbitration uses both with a different 3rd party for

Mediation happens when a 3rd party comes in and helps improve the relationship, enhances communication, and uses effective problem solving techniques. Administrative or managerial approaches and procedures used if conflict is between employees or members of an organization. The 3rd party, who does is allowed to make a decision is doing the mediation and is allowed to make a decision if need be. This approach reminds me of how the military handles conflict within their ranks. Being in the military I have seen this process conducted, they will allow the parties to try to resolve their own conflict, but if they cannot the authority figure does it for them. Arbitration is a private process still including a 3rd party that helps resolve the conflict. Arbitration comes in two forms med-arb and mediation then arbitration. Med-arb uses mediation as the first step to resolve the conflict, if mediation does not work they move on to arbitration, while the mediation then arbitration uses both with a different 3rd party for

Pros of Arbitration - Arbitration is a way to resolve disputes efficiently, proponents of arbitration commonly point to a number of advantages it offers over litigation, court

Since November 2015, after Justice Marks vacated the RSDCs previous decision, the Nationals have attempted to compel MASN to return to arbitration before the RSDC. The Nationals claimed that a footnote in the Justice’ decision meant that MASN needed to submit to arbitration if the Nationals just changed their lawyers. On the other hand, MASN felt that the sides should agree to submit this case before a different arbitral body and thereby avoid the appeals process. Failing this, MASN wanted its appeal to be heard before a second arbitration case would be heard before the RSDC.

The requisite credentials of an arbitrator are integrity, impartiality, and a simple requirement to maintain a professional competence that conveys the appearance of violating the prohibition of ex parte communications. Ex parte communication is of primary concern to the arbitration process; as such, the arbitrator should take every precautionary measure, within reason, to abide by the general guidelines, the arbitrations proceedings, and the involved parties. It is appropriate for the arbitrator to respond accordingly to the needs of the parties and make every reasonable effort

Finally, based on common law, the principle of comity and equity may oblige the courts to recognize foreign arbitral award, regardless where the arbitration was seated. The US Courts

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

Arbitration has been one of the most effective ways to resolve a dispute between parties. Normally this process requires two attorneys representing different parties, making there case to an Arbitrator as to why there side is a better way to resolve there issues. It is then up to the Arbitrator to decide which party wins. Arbitration is found in many professions. However, one of the professions it is most popular is in Baseball.

From the worker's point of view, arbitration may not be as compelling as their day in court. Many large corporations require their workers and consumers to sign employment contracts containing mandatory arbitrations as part of their employment policies (Stone & Colvin, 2015). Companies, such as Anheuser-Busch, utilize a dispute resolution process which helps to resolve conflicts before they even go to arbitration. Not only is the dispute resolution process effective, but fewer cases go to arbitration at all. Employees who are represented by a union will often have the union to request the mediation. Employees may use arbitrators if they feel they have been treated unfairly. Arbitration gives the opportunity for the employee and company to make their cases using a third party to present a written decision. The decision is often binding and cannot be taken to court. In some companies, the arbitration contracts can be non-binding, but this is a rare case.

One of the foundations of arbitration is that awards rendered are final and not subject to appeal before the courts. In this respect, Article 5 of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides for minimal intervention, and says, “In matters governed by this Law, no court shall intervene except where so provided in this Law“. As a result, the grounds upon which a court may set aside an award or refuse to recognize and enforce the same are limited. Article 34 of the Model Law and Article V of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provide the restrictive grounds for such relief.

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.