Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Additional Forms of Dispute Resolution
Describe the different types of ADR
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to the various methods of resolving legal disputes outside of the traditional court system. The four main forms of ADR in the UK are:
- Negotiation: This is the simplest and most informal form of ADR, involving direct discussions between the parties to try to reach a resolution without involving a third party. Negotiation can take place either face-to-face or through correspondence.
- Mediation: Mediation involves the use of a neutral third party, known as a mediator, to help the parties to reach a mutually acceptable solution. The mediator facilitates communication and assists the parties in identifying and exploring the underlying issues of the dispute. Mediation is non-binding and the parties are free to withdraw from the process at any time.
- Conciliation: Conciliation is similar to mediation in that a neutral third party, known as a conciliator, is used to help the parties to reach a resolution. However, the conciliator is usually more active in proposing solutions and may even make recommendations for settlement. Conciliation is also non-binding.
- Arbitration: Arbitration involves the use of an independent third party, known as an arbitrator, to make a binding decision on the dispute. The parties agree to be bound by the arbitrator’s decision, which is usually made on the basis of evidence and arguments presented by the parties. Arbitration is generally more formal and structured than the other forms of ADR.
Overall, the main advantage of ADR is that it can be faster, less expensive, and less formal than going to court. It can also be less adversarial, allowing the parties to maintain a better relationship going forward. However, ADR may not be appropriate for all disputes, particularly those that involve complex legal or factual issues.
Tribulans
Employment Tribunals
Employment tribunals are judicial bodies in the United Kingdom that have jurisdiction over a wide range of employment-related disputes. These tribunals were established under the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 and consist of a panel of three members - a legally qualified employment judge and two non-legal lay members. Here are some key features of employment tribunals in the UK:
Jurisdiction:
Employment tribunals have jurisdiction over a wide range of employment-related disputes including unfair dismissal, discrimination, redundancy payments, wages, and breach of contract claims.
Procedure: Employment tribunal proceedings are generally less formal than court proceedings. Parties can represent themselves, but most cases are represented by a lawyer or a trade union representative. The tribunal process usually involves a hearing where both parties present evidence and witnesses.
Powers:
Employment tribunals have the power to order reinstatement or compensation for the claimant if they find in their favor. The amount of compensation awarded can vary widely depending on the nature of the claim and the tribunal's discretion.
Appeals: Decisions made by employment tribunals can be appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) on points of law. Further appeals can be made to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, although the grounds for appeal are limited.
Costs: One of the key advantages of employment tribunals is that they are relatively inexpensive. The claimant does not have to pay a fee to bring a claim, although they may need to pay for legal representation.
Time: Employment tribunal cases can take several months to be heard, depending on the complexity of the case and the tribunal's workload.
Overall, employment tribunals provide an accessible and relatively low-cost forum for resolving employment disputes. However, they are not without their limitations, particularly when it comes to appeals and the limited grounds for appeal.
Evaluation
Advantages:
- Often faster and less expensive than going to court.
- Less formal and more flexible than court proceedings, making it useful for resolving disputes between parties who have an ongoing relationship.
- Allows parties to retain control over the outcome of the dispute.
- Can lead to more creative and flexible solutions that meet the needs of both parties.
Disadvantages:
- Decisions made through ADR are not legally binding, and parties are not required to comply with them.
- Settlements may not fully reflect the legal rights of the parties.
- ADR can sometimes result in a compromise or settlement that may not fully reflect the legal rights of the parties.
