Mediation and arbitration are techniques of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that are meant to avoid the high expense and unpredictability of a lawsuit. Mediation and arbitration are both private methods of resolving disputes. This implies that, unlike a court case, they are not open to the public. This secrecy may be critical to one or both of the parties engaged in the dispute. Mediation and arbitration may also enable the parties to define their own ground rules for resolving their conflict, such as the forms of evidence that can be given, the types of experts who can be consulted, and the principles on which the final agreement or judgement will be based.
Mediation is a more informal method of settling a conflict. The mediator is a third party who acts as a neutral third party to assist the parties in negotiating a settlement to their dispute. It is the responsibility of the parties in mediation to reach an agreement; it is not the mediator’s business to make or enforce any choices on the parties. The mediator listens to both sides and makes ideas to assist the parties reach an agreement. The benefit of mediation is that since both parties engage in settling the disagreement, they are more likely to follow through on the agreed-upon solution. One downside of mediation is that the parties may be unable to reach an agreement and will thus wind up in court.
Arbitration is a more formal method of settling disagreements. Arbitration often adheres to strict procedural norms, and the arbitrator may have legal experience that a mediator does not. The arbitrator is a neutral third party who should have some knowledge of the subject matter of the dispute. The parties should agree on who will be the arbitrator and how he or she will be chosen. Unlike a mediator, the arbitrator has the ability to make binding rulings and conclusions on the parties. The arbitrator’s function is to listen to all sides and then provide a ruling that is binding on both parties. Arbitration eliminates the chance that the parties will fail to reach an agreement and will wind up in court nevertheless since the arbitrator makes judgments that are legally enforceable. The drawback of this is that one or both parties may be unsatisfied with the outcome. If you ever need to book an arbitration venue, simply log on to AIAC’s website to make a booking now.
Both methods have pros and cons. The key benefits they both offer over a trial are cost and time savings, as well as a higher degree of predictability in the result. These might be critical issues for a small company owner. There are also some drawbacks to adopting mediation and arbitration. Because these alternative methods are not required to follow legal precedent in reaching a conclusion, parties cannot rely on legal precedent to determine the outcome. The parties may also struggle to find a mediator or arbitrator who they are certain will be objective or impartial.
For more blog articles like this, click here.