Alternative Dispute Resolution
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
By this article the author continues the analysis of the institute of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in civil and commercial law. The conception of ADR institute, the reasons for this institute to emerge and prosper, the results and prospectives of its' legal and social adaptation in Europe were analysed in article „Alternative Resolution of CiIvil and Commercial Disputes“ [1].
In the presented article the author, using the experience of applying ADR in the United States of America, countries of Europe, endeavours to discover the merits and demerits of resolving disputes in court and in alternative ways. The analysis provides a deeper look at the reasons for such merits and demerits to exist, also their legal evaluation and recommendations for the reglamentation of ADR institute.
In the author's oppinion, the recognition of the merits and demerits of resolving disputes in court and in alternative ways enables to neutralize both negative features of ADR and litigation, which hinder to resolve arising disputes promptly and efficiently. The author believes that this can be reached by combining the proceses of ADR and litigation, also highlighing and using thoroughly the merits of one or another mechanism of dispute resolution. Highlighting of positive and negative features of the dispute resolution mechnisms also enables to take a glance on litigation in the perspective of all available dispute resolution alternatives. The knowledge of pluses and minuses of different ways of dispute resolution allows to realize that litigation is not the panacea from all the problems, i.e. is not the only way of handling the disputes.
Such a knowledge broadens the conceptual frame of litigation, allows to choose reasonably and consciously the most suitable way of solving a particular dispute – litigation, arbitration, mediation, concillication or any other kind of ADR. Thus the article helps to perceive better theoretical grounds of ADR and its' practical application, also to see the litigation itself in the new light.
In the presented article the author, using the experience of applying ADR in the United States of America, countries of Europe, endeavours to discover the merits and demerits of resolving disputes in court and in alternative ways. The analysis provides a deeper look at the reasons for such merits and demerits to exist, also their legal evaluation and recommendations for the reglamentation of ADR institute.
In the author's oppinion, the recognition of the merits and demerits of resolving disputes in court and in alternative ways enables to neutralize both negative features of ADR and litigation, which hinder to resolve arising disputes promptly and efficiently. The author believes that this can be reached by combining the proceses of ADR and litigation, also highlighing and using thoroughly the merits of one or another mechanism of dispute resolution. Highlighting of positive and negative features of the dispute resolution mechnisms also enables to take a glance on litigation in the perspective of all available dispute resolution alternatives. The knowledge of pluses and minuses of different ways of dispute resolution allows to realize that litigation is not the panacea from all the problems, i.e. is not the only way of handling the disputes.
Such a knowledge broadens the conceptual frame of litigation, allows to choose reasonably and consciously the most suitable way of solving a particular dispute – litigation, arbitration, mediation, concillication or any other kind of ADR. Thus the article helps to perceive better theoretical grounds of ADR and its' practical application, also to see the litigation itself in the new light.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Section
Articles
Authors contributing to Jurisprudence agree to publish their articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public (CC BY-NC-ND) License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit, and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this licence are made clear.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
