Role of Arbitration and Mediation in the Legal System

This type of mediation may be quite similar to mediation that occurs in the civil context such as personal injury or family cases. Prior to commencing mediation, counsel should ensure that the client is prepared to engage in a give and take, mediation requires the agreement from the opposing side thus neither party is going to leave without some concession. Further, the general public has more exposure to the adversarial approach of courtrooms, as such they will need to be prepared for the relaxed and collaborative approach of mediation.

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

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is the term used to describe the resolution of disputes inside or outside the legal system, without formal adjudication. It includes arbitration, mediation, conciliation and negotiation. There are problems associated with going to court. These include the adversarial process used to find a winner and loser, which often creates stress for, and increases the division between litigants. The advantages associated with the use of ADR have prompted a debate whether Parliament should make it compulsory for all litigants to first use ADR before they go to court to seek solutions to their differences.

Mediators are neutral and harbor no invested interest in the conflict or with any of the parties involved. The recommendations made by the mediator is not binding unless all parties agree to the settlement. Going into mediation allows the people engaged in an on-going conflict to reach a mutual agreement, settling their differences instead of participating in lengthy and expensive court proceedings.

The task of creating a Mediation venue on the UNTD campus, has met with some resistance, not intention, but resistance just the same. In order for the venue to be set up on campus, the Provost of the Human Services Department, Dr. Lacy and Professor La Crisia Gilbert, also if the venue receives any type of federal funding, the CFO’s office has to been involved to regulate the funds. Professor La Crisia Gilbert, will be our faculty advisor, and students will run the venue.

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

Critically analyse whether ADR methods such as mediation offer a better forum for resolving family law disputes than the courts, thus providing greater access to justice:

In the human services field there is a combination of areas that require mediation and advocacy. Human services consist of and utilize a number of disciplines. Mediation is usually defined as a process in which an impartial third party helps parties resolve a dispute or plan a transaction by assisting their negotiations. Approaches, however, can vary considerably. Many mediators tend to use the same approach regardless of the situations of the parties. But others are flexible and do whatever will work. Each approach has potential advantages and disadvantages. Advocacy is helping or assisting those within a special population

A potential advantage of ADR is that because parties voluntarily involve themselves in the process, and in most cases agree to the outcome there is rarely a difficulty with enforcement. Enforcement is a much greater potential problem of litigation where a party who has lost in court may be unwilling to meet judgement. At the same time, individuals have pointed to the advantages of the type of settlement which could be achieved by ADR over the costly and divisive nature of litigation.

Throughout the years there has been many definitions of mediation. Nevertheless one the most acceptable definition of mediation refers to this procedure as a “…process in which the participants, with the support of a mediator, identify issues, develop options, consider alternatives and make decisions about future actions…” . They also described mediators as the third party assisting the participants in reaching their decision. This process should form a part of the pre-trial civil litigation process as its advantages on the legal system and the community outweigh its disadvantages. The distinguishing models of mediation make it a suitable approach for all or most civil cases.

     Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR refers to a number of various processes that can be used to resolve legal disputes other than by litigation. Recently, methods of dispute resolution which focus on arbitration, mediation and negotiation as an alternative to adjudication have gained notoriety. This notoriety may have been caused by the public perception that ADR methods are less expensive, more efficient, and more satisfactory than the normal traditional course of litigation. The goals of establishing these processes to resolve disputes as an alternative to more formal legal processes include: 1) to make the regular court system more efficient, less costly and more responsive to the needs of the litigants;

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.

and is a way to be as fair as possible (Fallow, n.d.) . A mediation is not always able to be settled and usually ends up in court when the two parties just can not find common ground (Fallow, n.d.) .  An arbitration is when a third party is hired to hear the sides of both parties and then makes a decision on how the matter should be handled  (Fallow, n.d.). In an arbitration one parties views are usually not considered and the arbitrator is the one that gets the say so (Fallow, n.d.) . It is not always seen as a fair way to handle things (Fallow, n.d.) . However it is the cheapest and fastest way to handle an issue outside of court  (Fallow, n.d.). An arbitration is a legal alternative to litigation (Fallow, n.d.) .  The decisions made by the arbitrator can not be challenged, so what they say is what goes (Fallow, n.d.) . This is were the unfair part came in, the other party may not have much legal experience and there is no way to make an appeal like in court, so they are stuck with the decision of the arbitrator (Fallow, n.d.) . The arbitrator is the final has the final say and most of the time they are going to favor the business in which hired them to resolve the matter (Fallow, n.d.) .