Today is Thursday, August 13, 2015

Republic of the Philippines

Congress of the Philippines
Metro Manila

Twelfth Congress
Third Regular Session

TERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES AND TO ESTABLISH THE OFFICE FOR ALTERNATIVE DI

CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

tonomy in the resolution of disputes or the freedom of the party to make their own arrangements to resolve their disputes. Towards th
tate shall provide means for the use of ADR as an efficient tool and an alternative procedure for the resolution of appropriate cases. L
as mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or any combination thereof as a means of achieving speedy and efficient means of resolving c

olve a dispute or controversy, other than by adjudication of a presiding judge of a court or an officer of a government agency, as defin
mbination thereof;

trator, neutral evaluator, or any person exercising similar functions in any Alternative Dispute Resolution system. This is without preju

ing as mediator, conciliator, arbitrator or neutral evaluator;

or in part, intended to identity the authenticating party and to adopt, accept or establish the authenticity of a record or term;

ators, appointed in accordance with the agreement of the parties, or rules promulgated pursuant to this Act, resolve a dispute by rend
 dispute that is the subject of an arbitration agreement;

controversy;

all relationships of a commercial nature, whether contractual or not;

or arbitration, expressly intended by the source not to be disclosed, or obtained under circumstances that would create a reasonable
memoranda, notes or work product of the neutral party or non-party participant, as defined in this Act; (2) an oral or written statement
motions manifestations, witness statements, reports filed or submitted in an arbitration or for expert evaluation;

es of the court, after such court has acquired jurisdiction of the dispute;

ccordance with the Agreement of the Parties when as action is prematurely commenced in violation of such agreement;

are brought together early in a pre-trial phase to present summaries of their cases and receive a nonbinding assessment by an experi

urt, that is vested by law with quasi-judicial power to resolve or adjudicate dispute involving the government, its agencies and instrum

ppines. It shall not include a domestic subsidiary of such international party or a coventurer in a joint venture with a party which has its

parties, facilitates communication and negotiation, and assist the parties in reaching a voluntary agreement regarding a dispute.

t is necessary to resolve the dispute;

mediation and arbitration;

e are argued before a panel comprising senior decision makers with or without the presence of a neutral third person after which the

y the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on 21 June 1985;

d Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards approved in 1958 and ratified by the Philippine Senate under Senate Resolution No. 71;

a Convention State;

tion.

tes in a mediation proceeding as a witness, resource person or expert;

g related pre-hearing motions, conferences and discovery;

nic or other similar medium, retrievable form; and

erve as arbitrators.

natures in Global and E-Commerce Act, and its implementing Rules and Regulations shall apply to proceeding contemplated in this A

he same civil liability for the Acts done in the performance of then duties as that of public officers as provided in Section 38 (1), Chap

on or settlement of the following: (a) labor disputes covered by Presidential Decree No. 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of th
gitime; (g) criminal liability; and (h) those which by law cannot be compromised.

CHAPTER 2 - MEDIATION

utional, other than court-annexed. The term "mediation' shall include conciliation.

ration must be given to the need to promote candor or parties and mediators through confidentiality of the mediation process, the poli
the mediation process rests with the parties.

subject to the following principles and guidelines:

any other person from disclosing a mediation communication.

any adversarial proceeding, whether judicial or quasi-judicial, However, evidence or information that is otherwise admissible or subjec

ed in a mediation may not be compelled to disclose confidential information obtained during mediation: (1) the parties to the dispute;
erk or assistant; and (6) any other person who obtains or possesses confidential information by reason of his/her profession.

failed to act impartially.

mediator who is wrongfully subpoenaed shall be reimbursed the full cost of his attorney's fees and related expenses.

aived in a record, or orally during a proceeding by the mediator and the mediation parties.

t if the information is provided by such nonparty participant.

ction 9 of this Chapter to bar disclosure of the rest of the information necessary to a complete understanding of the previously disclos

lege under Section 9, to the extent that the communication prejudices another person in the proceeding and it is necessary for the pe

s:

eement;

open, or is required by law to be open, to the public;

nce;

conceal an ongoing crime or criminal activity;

tation in a proceeding in which a public agency is protecting the interest of an individual protected by law; but this exception does not

conduct or malpractice filed against mediator in a proceeding; or

conduct of malpractice filed against a party, nonparty participant, or representative of a party based on conduct occurring during a m

hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery of the proponent of the evidence has shown that the evidence is not otherwise av

orm or avoid a liability on a contract arising out of the mediation.

or testify in such proceeding.

(b), only the portion of the communication necessary for the application of the exception for nondisclosure may be admitted. The adm

ecommendation, finding, or other communication regarding a mediation to a court or agency or other authority that make a ruling on a

ing operative principles:

hall:

hether there are any known facts that a reasonable individual would consider likely to affect the impartiality of the mediator, including

is practical before accepting a mediation.

ting a mediation, the mediator shall disclose it as soon as practicable.

s/her qualifications to mediate a dispute.

nless the special qualifications of a mediator are required in the mediation agreement or by the mediation parties.

a lawyer or any other person to provide assistance in the mediation. A lawyer of this right shall be made in writing by the party waiving

eement, the place of mediation shall be any place convenient and appropriate to all parties.

ment to submit a dispute to mediation by any institution shall include an agreement to be bound by the internal mediation and admini
iation of the dispute and for the mediator, the parties, their respective counsel, and nonparty participants to abide by such rules.
prevail.

owing operative principles:

es with the assistance of their respective counsel, if any, and by the mediator.

n thereof complete and make adequate provisions for the contingency of breach to avoid conflicting interpretations of the agreement.

The mediator shall certify that he/she explained the contents of the settlement agreement to the parties in a language known to them

ate Clerk of a Regional Trial Court of the place where one of the parties resides. Where there is a need to enforce the settlement agr
ay be promulgated by the Supreme Court.

sole arbitrator for the dispute and shall treat the settlement agreement as an arbitral award which shall be subject to enforcement und

CHAPTER 3 - OTHER ADR FORMS

ssues arising in a dispute or during its pendency to other forms of ADR such as but not limited to (a) the evaluation of a third person

here it is combined with arbitration in which case it shall likewise be governed by Chapter 5 of this Act.

CHAPTER 4 - INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION

ercial arbitration shall be governed by the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (the "Model Law") adopted by the Unite

tional origin and to the need for uniformity in its interpretation and resort may be made to the travaux preparatories and the report of
reference number A/CN. 9/264."

ationships of a commercial nature, whether contractual or not. Relationships of a transactions: any trade transaction for the supply or
nking; insurance; joint venture and other forms of industrial or business cooperation; carriage of goods or passengers by air, sea, rail

he Philippines, a party may be presented by any person of his choice. Provided, that such representative, unless admitted to the pra
appears.

, evidence and the arbitral award, shall be considered confidential and shall not be published except (1) with the consent of the partie
g may issue a protective order to prevent or prohibit disclosure of documents or information containing secret processes, developmen

bject matter of an arbitration agreement shall, if at least one party so requests not later that the pre-trial conference, or upon the reque

of the law in favor of arbitration. Where action is commenced by or against multiple parties, one or more of whom are parties who ar

mean the person or institution named in the arbitration agreement as the appointing authority; or the regular arbitration arbitration ins
, they shall be deemed to have agreed to procedure under such arbitration rules for the selection and appointment of arbitrators. In a
Articles 11(3), 11(4), 13(3) and 14(1) of the Model Law shall be performed by the Appointing Authority, unless the latter shall fail or re

itution of the tribunal, from a Court an interim measure of protection and for the Court to grant such measure. After constitution of the
al tribunal has no power to act or is unable to act effectively, the request may be made with the Court. The arbitral tribunal is deemed
ived by the party making request.

ty:

security or any act or omission specified in the order.

easonable means to the Court or arbitral tribunal as the case may be and the party against whom the relief is sought, describing in ap

ing an interim measure ordered by an arbitral tribunal.

ulting from noncompliance, including all expenses, and reasonable attorney's fees, paid in obtaining the order's judicial enforcement.

e agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of a party, order any party to take such interim measures of protection
minary injuction directed against a party, appointment of receivers or detention, preservation, inspection of property that is the subject

reement, the place of arbitration shall be in Metro Manila, unless the arbitral tribunal, having regard to the circumstances of the case,

ate for consultation among its members, for hearing witnesses, experts, or the parties, or for inspection of goods, other property or do

be used in the arbitral proceedings. Failing such agreement, the language to be used shall be English in international arbitration, and
otherwise specified therein, shall apply to any written statement by a party, any hearing and any award, decision or other communica

o the language or languages agreed upon by the parties or determined in accordance with paragraph 1 of this section.

CHAPTER 5 - DOMESTIC ARBITRATION

y Republic Act No. 876, otherwise known as "The Arbitration Law" as amended by this Chapter. The term "domestic arbitration" as us
of the Model Law and Section 22 to 31 of the preceding Chapter 4 shall apply to domestic arbitration.

CHAPTER 6 - ARBITRATION OF CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES

utes shall be governed by Executive Order No. 1008, otherwise known as the Constitution Industry Arbitration Law.

iction of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (the "Commission") shall include those between or among parties to, or wh
a construction project.

although the arbitration is "commercial" pursuant to Section 21 of this Act.

an arbitrator may act as mediator and a mediator may act as arbitrator. The parties may also agree in writing that, following a succes

C) shall promulgate rules to allow for the appointment of a foreign arbitrator or coarbitrator or chairman of a tribunal a person who has

C;

s the common choice of the two CIAC-accredited arbitrators first appointed one of whom was nominated by the international party; an

nd Section 28 and 29 of this Act shall apply to arbitration of construction disputes covered by this Chapter.

nstruction dispute is filed shall, upon becoming aware, not later than the pretrial conference, that the parties had entered into an arbitr
olve the dispute.

CHAPTER 7 - JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ARBITRAL AWARDS

Section 23 of R.A. 876.

decisions of the Regional Trial Court.

les of Procedure to be promulgated by the Supreme Court.

r E.O. No. 1008.

ppropriate regional trial court in accordance with the rules of procedure to be promulgated by the Supreme Court only on those groun

nition and enforcement of arbitral awards covered by the said Convention.

nce with the rules of procedure to be promulgated by the Supreme Court. Said procedural rules shall provide that the party relying on
uages, the party shall supply a duly certified translation thereof into any of such languages.
e New York Convention.

al court may, if it considers it proper, vacate its decision and may also, on the application of the party claiming recognition or enforcem

Convention. - The recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards not covered by the New York Convention shall be done in

a court of a foreign country, shall be recognized and enforced as a foreign arbitral award and not a judgment of a foreign court.

award and not as a judgment of a foreign court.

r as final and executory decisions of courts of law of the Philippines.

se an application for recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award in accordance with the procedural rules to be promulgated by

irming, vacating, setting aside, modifying or correcting an arbitral award may be appealed to the Court of Appeals in accordance with

by the appealant court to post counterbond executed in favor of the prevailing party equal to the amount of the award in accordance w

ement or for vacation, setting aside, correction or modification of an arbitral award, and any application with a court for arbitration ass
or the act to be enjoined is located; (iii) where any of the parties to the dispute resides or has his place of business; or (iv) in the Natio

an arbitral award, the Court shall send notice to the parties at their address of record in the arbitration, or if any party cannot be serve

CHAPTER 8 - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

ative Dispute Resolution as an attached agency to the Department of Justice (DOJ) which shall have a Secretariat to be headed by a

ADR, and recommend to Congress needful statutory changes to develop. Strengthen and improve ADR practices in accordance with

ernative Dispute Resolution shall have the following powers and functions:

professional training provided by the office;

ment ADR programs;

ct.

ed in the General Appropriations Act of the year following its enactment into law and thereafter.
 Act, the secretary of justice shall convene a committee that shall formulate the appropriate rules and regulations necessary for the im

mittee for review and approval. The Oversight Committee shall be composed of the chairman of the Senate Committee on Justice and

amend or modify the jurisdiction of the Katarungan Pambarangay under Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Govern

sistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.

held unconstitutional or invalid, all other parts or provisions not affected shall thereby continue to remain in full force and effect.

tional newspapers of general circulation.

FRANKLIN DRILON JOSE DE VENECIA JR.

President of the Senate Speaker of the House of
Representatives

he Senate and the House of Representatives on February 4, 2004.

OSCAR G. YABES ROBERTO P. NAZARENO

Secretary of Senate Secretary General
House of Represenatives

GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
President of the Philippines
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR; known in some countries, such as Australia,[1] as external
dispute resolution) includes dispute resolutionprocesses and techniques that act as a means for
disagreeing parties to come to an agreement short of litigation. It is a collective term for the ways
that parties can settle disputes, with (or without) the help of a third party.

Despite historic resistance to ADR by many popular parties and their advocates, ADR has gained
widespread acceptance among both the general public and the legal profession in recent years. In
fact, some courts now require some parties to resort to ADR of some type, usually mediation, before
permitting the parties' cases to be tried (indeed the European Mediation Directive (2008)expressly
contemplates so-called "compulsory" mediation; this means that attendance is compulsory, not that
settlement must be reached through mediation). Additionally, parties to M&A transactions are
increasingly turning to ADR to resolve post-acquisition disputes.[2]

The rising popularity of ADR can be explained by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the
perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the
desire of some parties to have greater control over the selection of the individual or individuals who
will decide their dispute.[3] Some of the senior judiciary in certain jurisdictions (of which England and
Wales is one) are strongly in favour of this (ADR) use of mediation to settle disputes.

Salient features[edit]
ADR is generally classified into at least four types: negotiation, mediation, collaborative law,
and arbitration. (Sometimes a fifth type, conciliation, is included as well, but for present purposes it
can be regarded as a form of mediation. Seeconciliation for further details.) ADR can be used
alongside existing legal systems such as sharia courts within common law jurisdictions such as the
UK.

ADR traditions vary somewhat by country and culture. There are significant common elements which
justify a main topic, and each country or region's difference should be delegated to sub-pages.

Alternative Dispute Resolution is of two historic types. First, methods for resolving disputes outside
of the official judicial mechanisms. Second, informal methods attached to or pendant to official
judicial mechanisms. There are in addition free-standing and or independent methods, such as
mediation programs and ombuds offices within organizations. The methods are similar, whether or
not they are pendant, and generally use similar tool or skill sets, which are basically sub-sets of the
skills of negotiation.

ADR includes informal tribunals, informal mediative processes, formal tribunals and formal mediative
processes. The classic formal tribunal forms of ADR are arbitration (both binding and advisory or
non-binding) and private judges (either sitting alone, on panels or over summary jury trials). The
classic formal mediative process is referral for mediation before a court appointed mediator or
mediation panel. Structured transformative mediation as used by the U.S. Postal Service is a formal
process. Classic informal methods include social processes, referrals to non-formal authorities (such
as a respected member of a trade or social group) and intercession. The major differences between
formal and informal processes are (a) pendency to a court procedure and (b) the possession or lack
of a formal structure for the application of the procedure.

For example, freeform negotiation is merely the use of the tools without any process. Negotiation
within a labor arbitration setting is the use of the tools within a highly formalized and controlled
setting.

Calling upon an organizational ombudsman's office is never, by itself, a formal procedure. (Calling
upon an organizational ombudsman is always voluntary; by the International Ombudsman
Association Standards of Practice, no one can be compelled to use an ombuds office.)

Organizational ombuds offices refer people to all conflict management options in the organization:
formal and informal, rights-based and interest-based. But, in addition, in part because they have no
decision-making authority, ombuds offices can, themselves, offer a wide spectrum of informal
options.

This spectrum is often overlooked in contemporary discussions of "ADR." "ADR" often refers to
external conflict management options that are important, but used only occasionally. An
organizational ombuds office typically offers many internal options that are used in hundreds of
cases a year. These options include:

delivering respect, for example, affirming the feelings of a visitor, while staying explicitly neutral
on the facts of a case,
active listening, serving as a sounding board,
providing and explaining information, one-on-one, for example, about policies and rules, and
about the context of a concern,
receiving vital information, one-on-one, for example, from those reporting unacceptable or illegal
behavior,
reframing issues,
helping to develop and evaluate new options for the issues at hand,
 offering the option of referrals to other resources, to "key people" in the relevant department, and
to managers and compliance offices,
helping people help themselves to use a direct approach, for example, helping people collect
and analyze their own information, helping people to draft a letter about their issues, coaching
and role-playing,
offering shuttle diplomacy, for example, helping employees and managers to think through
proposals that may resolve a dispute, facilitating discussions,
offering mediation inside the organization,
"looking into" a problem informally,
facilitating a generic approach to an individual problem, for example instigating or offering
training on a given issue, finding ways to promulgate an existing policy,
identifying and communicating throughout the organization about "new issues,"
identifying and communicating about patterns of issues,
working for systems change, for example, suggesting new policies, or procedures,
following up with a visitor, following up on a system change recommendation. (See Rowe, Mary,
Informality The Fourth Standard of Practice, in JIOA, vol 5, no 1, (2012) pp 817.)

Informal referral to a co-worker known to help people work out issues is an informal procedure. Co-
worker interventions are usually informal.

Conceptualizing ADR in this way makes it easy to avoid confusing tools and methods (does
negotiation once a lawsuit is filed cease to be ADR? If it is a tool, then the question is the wrong
question) (is mediation ADR unless a court orders it? If you look at court orders and similar things as
formalism, then the answer is clear: court annexed mediation is merely a formal ADR process).

Dividing lines in ADR processes are often provider driven rather than consumer driven. Educated
consumers will often choose to use many different options depending on the needs and
circumstances that they face.

Finally, it is important to realize that conflict resolution is one major goal of all the ADR processes. If
a process leads to resolution, it is a dispute resolution process.[5]

The salient features of each type are as follows:

1. In negotiation, participation is voluntary and there is no third party who facilitates the
resolution process or imposes a resolution. (NB a third party like a chaplain or
organizational ombudsperson or social worker or a skilled friend may be coaching one or
both of the parties behind the scene, a process called "Helping People Help Themselves"
see Helping People Help Themselves, in Negotiation Journal July 1990, pp. 239248, which
includes a section on helping someone draft a letter to someone who is perceived to have
wronged them.)
 2. In mediation, there is a third party, a mediator, who facilitates the resolution process (and
may even suggest a resolution, typically known as a "mediator's proposal"), but
does not impose a resolution on the parties. In some countries (for example, the United
Kingdom), ADR is synonymous with what is generally referred to as mediation in other
countries.
3. In collaborative law or collaborative divorce, each party has an attorney who facilitates the
resolution process within specifically contracted terms. The parties reach agreement with
support of the attorneys (who are trained in the process) and mutually-agreed experts. No
one imposes a resolution on the parties. However, the process is a formalized process that
is part of the litigation and court system. Rather than being an Alternative Resolution
methodology it is a litigation variant that happens to rely on ADR like attitudes and
processes.
4. In arbitration, participation is typically voluntary, and there is a third party who, as a private
judge, imposes a resolution. Arbitrations often occur because parties to contracts agree that
any future dispute concerning the agreement will be resolved by arbitration. This is known
as a 'Scott Avery Clause'.[6] In recent years, the enforceability of arbitration clauses,
particularly in the context of consumer agreements (e.g., credit cardagreements), has drawn
scrutiny from courts.[7] Although parties may appeal arbitration outcomes to courts, such
appeals face an exacting standard of review.[8]

Beyond the basic types of alternative dispute resolutions there are other different forms of ADR:

Case evaluation: a non-binding process in which parties present the facts and the issues to a
neutral case evaluator who advises the parties on the strengths and weaknesses of their
respective positions, and assesses how the dispute is likely to be decided by a jury or other
adjudicator.
Early neutral evaluation: a process that takes place soon after a case has been filed in court.
The case is referred to an expert who is asked to provide a balanced and neutral evaluation of
the dispute. The evaluation of the expert can assist the parties in assessing their case and may
influence them towards a settlement.
Family group conference: a meeting between members of a family and members of their
extended related group. At this meeting (or often a series of meetings) the family becomes
involved in learning skills for interaction and in making a plan to stop the abuse or other ill-
treatment between its members.
Neutral fact-finding: a process where a neutral third party, selected either by the disputing
parties or by the court, investigates an issue and reports or testifies in court. The neutral fact-
finding process is particularly useful for resolving complex scientific and factual disputes.
 Ombuds: third party selected by an institution for example a university, hospital, corporation or
government agency to deal with complaints by employees, clients or constituents. The
Standards of Practice for Organizational Ombuds may be found
at http://www.ombudsassociation.org/standards/.

An organizational ombudsman works within the institution to look into complaints independently and
impartially.[9]

"Alternative" dispute resolution is usually considered to be alternative to litigation. It also can be used
as a colloquialism for allowing a dispute to drop or as an alternative to violence.

In recent years there has been more discussion about taking a systems approach in order to offer
different kinds of options to people who are in conflict, and to foster "appropriate" dispute
resolution.[10]

That is, some cases and some complaints in fact ought to go to formal grievance or to court or to the
police or to a compliance officer or to a government IG. Other conflicts could be settled by the
parties if they had enough support and coaching, and yet other cases need mediation or arbitration.
Thus "alternative" dispute resolution usually means a method that is not the courts. "Appropriate"
dispute resolution considers all the possible responsible options for conflict resolution that are
relevant for a given issue.[11]

ADR can increasingly be conducted online, which is known as online dispute resolution (ODR, which
is mostly a buzzword and an attempt to create a distinctive product). It should be noted, however,
that ODR services can be provided by government entities, and as such may form part of the
litigation process. Moreover, they can be provided on a global scale, where no effective domestic
remedies are available to disputing parties, as in the case of the UDRP and domain namedisputes.
In this respect, ODR might not satisfy the "alternative" element of ADR.

Benefits[edit]
ADR has been increasingly used internationally, both alongside and integrated formally into legal
systems, in order to capitalise on the typical advantages of ADR over litigation:

Suitability for multi-party disputes

Flexibility of procedure - the process is determined and controlled by the parties to the dispute
Lower costs
Less complexity ("less is more")
Parties choice of neutral third party (and therefore expertise in area of dispute) to direct
negotiations/adjudicate
Likelihood and speed of settlements
 Practical solutions tailored to parties interests and needs (not rights and wants,as they may
perceive them)
Durability of agreements
Confidentiality
The preservation of relationships and the preservation of reputations

Arbitration[edit]

The process of arbitration can start only if there exists a valid Arbitration Agreement between the
parties prior to the emergence of the dispute. As per Section 7, such an agreement must be in
writing. The contract regarding which the dispute exists, must either contain an arbitration clause or
must refer to a separate document signed by the parties containing the arbitration agreement. The
existence of an arbitration agreement can also be inferred by written correspondence such as
letters, telex, or telegrams which provide a record of the agreement. An exchange of statement of
claim and defense in which existence of an arbitration agreement is alleged by one party and not
denied by other is also considered as valid written arbitration agreement.

Any party to the dispute can start the process of appointing arbitrator and if the other party does not
cooperate, the party can approach the office of Chief Justice for appointment of an arbitrator. There
are only two grounds upon which a party can challenge the appointment of an arbitrator
reasonable doubt in the impartiality of the arbitrator and the lack of proper qualification of the
arbitrator as required by the arbitration agreement. A sole arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators so
appointed constitute the Arbitration Tribunal.

Except for some interim measures, there is very little scope for judicial intervention in the arbitration
process. The arbitration tribunal has jurisdiction over its own jurisdiction. Thus, if a party wants to
challenge the jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal, it can do so only before the tribunal itself. If the
tribunal rejects the request, there is little the party can do except to approach a court after the
tribunal makes an award. Section 34 provides certain grounds upon which a party can appeal to the
principal civil court of original jurisdiction for setting aside the award.

The period for filing an appeal for setting aside an award is over, or if such an appeal is rejected, the
award is binding on the parties and is considered as a decree of the court.

Conciliation[edit]

Conciliation is a less formal form of arbitration. This process does not require an existence of any
prior agreement. Any party can request the other party to appoint a conciliator. One conciliator is
preferred but two or three are also allowed. In case of multiple conciliators, all must act jointly. If a
party rejects an offer to conciliate, there can be no conciliation.
Parties may submit statements to the conciliator describing the general nature of the dispute and the
points at issue. Each party sends a copy of the statement to the other. The conciliator may request
further details, may ask to meet the parties, or communicate with the parties orally or in writing.
Parties may even submit suggestions for the settlement of the dispute to the conciliator.

When it appears to the conciliator that elements of settlement exist, he may draw up the terms of
settlement and send it to the parties for their acceptance. If both the parties sign the settlement
document, it shall be final and binding on both.

Note that in USA, this process is similar to Mediation. However, in India, Mediation is different from
Conciliation and is a completely informal type of ADR mechanism.

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Definition
Any method of resolving disputes other than by litigation. Abbreviated as ADR. Public
courts may be asked to review the validity of ADR methods, but they will rarely
overturn ADR decisions and awards if the disputing parties formed a valid contract to
abide by them. Arbitration and mediation are the two major forms of ADR.

Overview
Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") refers to any means of settling disputes outside
of the courtroom. ADR typically includes early neutral evaluation, negotiation,
conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. As burgeoning court queues, rising costs of
litigation, and time delays continue to plague litigants, more states have begun
experimenting with ADR programs. Some of these programs are voluntary; others are
mandatory.

While the two most common forms of ADR are arbitration and mediation, negotiation is
almost always attempted first to resolve a dispute. It is the preeminent mode of dispute
resolution. Negotiation allows the parties to meet in order to settle a dispute. The main
advantage of this form of dispute settlement is that it allows the parties themselves to
control the process and the solution.
Mediation is also an informal alternative to litigation. Mediators are individuals trained
in negotiations, who bring opposing parties together and attempt to work out a
settlement or agreement that both parties accept or reject. Mediation is used for a wide
gamut of case-types ranging from juvenile felonies to federal government negotiations
with Native American Indian tribes. Mediation has also become a significant method for
resolving disputes between investors and their stock brokers. See Securities Dispute
Resolution.

Arbitration is a simplified version of a trial involving limited discovery and simplified

rules of evidence. The arbitration is headed and decided by an arbitral panel. To
comprise a panel, either both sides agree on one arbitrator, or each side selects one
arbitrator and the two arbitrators elect the third. Arbitration hearings usually last
between a few days to a week, and the panel only meets for a few hours per day. The
panel then deliberates and issues a written decision, or arbitral award. Opinions are not
public record. Arbitration has long been used in labor, construction, and securities
regulation, but is now gaining popularity in other business disputes. Title 9 of the U.S.
Code establishes federal law supporting arbitration. It is based on Congress's plenary
power over interstate commerce. Where Title 9 applies, its terms prevail over state law.
There are, however, numerous state laws on ADR. Forty-nine states have adopted the
1956 version of the Uniform Arbitration Act as state law. The act was revised in 2000
and subsequently adopted by twelve states. The arbitration agreement and award is
now enforceable under both state and federal law.

In 1958, the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards was drafted to aid in the enforcement in domestic courts of awards
granted in foreign countries. As of August 2007, there were 142 countries participating
in the convention. In 1970, the United States joined the UN Convention on the
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
As the Philippine judiciary continues to battle with hundreds of thousands of cases pending before it,
the Supreme Court of the Philippines through the Justice Reform Initiatives Support (JURIS) Project
promotes the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to help de-clog the court
dockets.

Latest figures show that while there are 702,147 pending cases in the country, excluding those at
the Supreme Court level, there are only 1,453 judges who can review and act on them. A Philippine
judge therefore handles an average of almost 500 cases, the number of which continues to increase
with about 50,000 new cases filed each year.

These challenges only further strengthen the need to look for alternative resolutions in handling
disputes, Atty. Hector Soliman, JURIS Project Director told reporters during a recent press
briefing. Funded by the Canadian International Development Agency and Chaired by the Honorable
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, Reynato Puno, the JURIS Project
revolutionized court case settlement across the country through ADR mechanisms such as Court-
Annexed Mediation (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR).

CAM is an enhanced pre-trial procedure that involves settling cases with the assistance of mediator,
an authorized officer of the court who helps parties identify issues and develop a proposal to resolve
disputes. If a settlement cannot be reached through CAM, the case is brought back to the court for
JDR process which requires a judge to become a mediator.

Atty. Soliman shared that since the inception of the JURIS Project in 2003, it has helped eased the
burden of 5 pilot trial courts by resolving almost 7,000 cases using ADR mechanisms. This meant
affording the judges more time to hear other complicated cases.
The success of the mechanism employed by JURIS in its pilot sites has created a demand for ADR
services in adjacent areas. Late last year, Judicial Dispute Resolution has also been introduced in
the trial courts in Makati City.

Whats also interesting is that the project has contributed to efforts to change the mindset of
the poor and marginalized groups, who often avoid legal matters due to sky-high cost of litigation
and their perception that the law favors the rich and educated. Seeing the success rate of ADR,
marginalized sectors have gained hope that they too can have access to justice, shared Atty.
Soliman.

Based on a study, 76% affirmed that ADR contributed to the ordinary citizens and the
marginalized sectors access to justice. Sixty-nine percent (69%) thinks that there is fairness and
justice in the mediation process, while 59% says there is fairness and justice in the mediation
outcome.

Aside from the ADR mechanisms, the JURIS Project has two other components, namely: (1) Judicial
Education and (2) Reform Advocacy Support which seeks to empower the poor to make use of
judicial and quasi-judicial services.

The implementing agencies of the JURIS Project are the Supreme Court of the Philippines
Program Management Office (SC-PMO); Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA); Office of the Court
Administrator (OCA); and Alternative Law Groups, Inc. (ALG).

The JURIS Project

The JURIS Project is a capacity building and technical assistance project that aims to contribute to
the efforts of the Philippine judiciary to improve the quality of judicial services and access to justice,
particularly by the poor and marginalized groups. The components of the JURIS project are as
follows:

1. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Covering both Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR), this
component targets mediation as a vehicle for de-clogging the courts, while providing effective and
inexpensive ways for dispute resolutions.

The settlement rates of Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) for pilot sites from July 2004 to December
2007 are as follows:
 Settlement
Pilot Site Referred Accepted Settled Rate
City of San Fernando and
Pampanga 5,053 3,616 2,204 60.95%
Bacolod andNegrosOccidental 3,862 3,060 1,695 55.39%
Baguio and Benguet (data from
October 2006 only) 2,795 1,782 959 53.81%
GRAND TOTAL 11,710 8,458 4,858 57.43%

On the other hand, the settlement rates for JURIS sites for the period from October 2006 to
December 2007 are as follows:

Referred Underwent
JURIS Site Cases JDR Settled Cases Settlement Rate
City of San Fernando
and Pampanga 1,419 1,343 391 29.1%
Bacolod City and
Negros Occidental 1,703 1,297 822 63.4%
Baguio City and
Benguet 2,121 1,197 329 27.5%
San Fernando City
and La Union 387 306 113 36.9%
Cagayan de Oro City
and Misamis Oriental 1,861 839 309 36.8%
GRAND TOTAL 7,488 4,982 1,964 39.42%

An independent study by Reginaldo Guillen shows 76% affirms that ADR contributed to the ordinary
citizens and the marginalized sectors access to justice. Sixty-nine percent (69%) thinks
that there is fairness and justice in the mediation process, while 59% says there is fairness and
justice in the mediation outcome.

2. Judicial Education

Aims to strengthen the capacity of PHILJA to plan, design and deliver effective, gender sensitive,
and socially responsive education and training for judges and court personnel, mediators, and
lawyers.

3. Reform Advocacy Support

Networking and collaboration between the judiciary and civil society to improve the quality of judicial
services and access to justice, and to empower the poor and marginalized groups to make use of
judicial and quasi-judicial services. Primary vehicle for the component is ALG, Inc.
The JURIS Project, with a duration from January 2003 to September 2008, is funded by the
Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). Project cost is Cdn$6.5 Million. The Canadian
executing agency is the National Judicial Institute (NJI) based in Ottawa.

(This release was issued during the media briefing of the JURIS Project Team on 2 July 2008 at the
Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Makati City.)

Related Posts:

1. Salient Points of the Amendments to Rules 41, 45, 58 and 65 of the Rules of Court
2. A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC (full text): Amendments to Rules 41, 45, 58 and 65 of the Rules of
Court
3. Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC; full text)
4. Rule 22 and Rule 24 of the Proposed Revised Rules of Civil Procedure (full text)
5. Face-to-Face Trial, Training Video (Rule 22 and Rule 24 of the Proposed Revised Rules
of Civil Procedure)