Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

WHAT IS THE USE OF ADR MECHANISM FOR ME AS A LAWYER.

ADR is an abbreviation that stands for ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’. ADR refers to all
those methods of solving disputes which are alternatives for litigation in the courts. ADR
processes are decision making process through which litigants or potential litigants may
resolve their disputes. These procedures are usually less costly and more expeditious. This
method can be used in commercial and labour disputes, divorce actions, in resolving tax-
claims and in other disputes that would likely otherwise involve court litigation.

ADR (alternative dispute resolution) usually describes dispute resolution where an


independent person (an ADR practitioner, such as a mediator) helps people in dispute to try
to sort out the issues between them. ADR can help people to resolve a dispute before it
becomes so big that a court or tribunal becomes involved. ADR can be very flexible and can
be used for almost any kind of dispute.

Using ADR can:

 Help you to resolve all or some of the issues in your dispute


 Provide a fair process
 Help you to achieve outcomes that work for everyone involved in the dispute.

Resolving your dispute through ADR is different from asking a court or tribunal to resolve
your dispute. Using ADR to resolve your dispute can benefit everyone. It means that courts
and tribunals can spend their time considering disputes that need a court or tribunal decision.

ADR processes can be less expensive than other ways of resolving your dispute. Going to a
court can be very expensive. Tribunals can be less expensive but can still involve hearings
and legal costs if you are represented.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is the procedure for settling disputes without
litigation, such as arbitration, mediation, or negotiation. ADR procedures are usually less
costly and more expeditious. They are increasingly being utilized in disputes that would
otherwise result in litigation, including high-profile labor disputes, divorce actions, and
personal injury claims.

One of the primary reasons parties may prefer ADR proceedings is that, unlike adversarial
litigation, ADR procedures are often collaborative and allow the parties to understand each
other's positions. ADR also allows the parties to come up with more creative solutions that a
court may not be legally allowed to impose.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a means of addressing and settling parties’ disputes
outside of court’s traditional adversarial setting. Today, alternative out-of-court mechanisms
for settling disputes are so effective that courts often require parties to pursue these
alternatives before litigating. For example, both mediation and arbitration, the two most
common ADR procedures, may be court-ordered. Settling one’s disputes through
mechanisms external to the court system may save you time and money.

The five different methods of ADR can be summarized as follows:

 Arbitration
 Conciliation
 Mediation
 Negotiation
 Lok Adalat

ARBITRATION

Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), is a technique for the resolution
of disputes outside the courts, where the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons –
arbitrators, by whose decision they agree to be bound. It is a resolution technique in which a
third party reviews the evidence in the case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for
both sides and enforceable. There are limited rights of review and appeal of Arbitration
awards. Arbitration is not the same as judicial proceedings and Mediation.

Arbitration can be either voluntary or mandatory. Of course, mandatory Arbitration can only
come from s statute or from a contract that is voluntarily entered into, where the parties agree
to hold all existing or future disputes to arbitration, without necessarily knowing, specifically,
what disputes will ever occur.

When two or more persons agree that a dispute or potential dispute between them shall be
decided in a legally binding way by one or more impartial persons in a judicial manner, the
agreement arrived after such settlement is called ‘arbitration agreement. The process is called
the ‘arbitration’ and the decision when made is called the ‘award’.
CONCILIATION

Conciliation is a process in which a third party assists the parties to resolve their disputes by
agreement. A conciliator may do this by expressing an opinion about the merits of the dispute
to help the parties to reach a settlement. Hence, conciliation is a compromise settlement with
the assistance of a conciliator.

Conciliation is “a process in which a neutral person meets with the parties to a dispute which
might be resolved; a relatively unstructured method of dispute resolution in which a third
party facilitates communication between parties in an attempt to help them settle their
differences”.

This consists in an attempt by a third party, designated by the litigants, to reconcile them
either before they resort to litigation (whether to court or arbitration), or after. The attempt to
conciliate is generally based on showing each side the contrary aspects of the dispute, in
order to bring each side together and to reach a solution.

MEDIATION

Mediation is a process for resolving disputes with the aid of an independent third person that
assists the parties in dispute to reach a negotiated resolution. Mediation is the acceptable
intervention into a dispute of a third party that has no authority to make a decision.

Mediation involves the help of a go-between third party, called a "mediator," whose job is to
help parties reach some mutual agreement. A mediator cannot force parties to agree and is not
even permitted decide the outcome of a dispute. Therefore, while mediating, both parties
retain significant control over the course of mediation. Mediation is fully confidential and
agreements are usually non-binding, so parties may still pursue litigation following the
mediation process.

NEGOTIATION

Negotiation is a process by which parties resolve their disputes. They agree upon course of
action and bargain for advantage. Sometimes, they try to adopt such a creative option that
serves their mutual interests. Because of its mutual advantages, people negotiate in almost all
walks of life, from home to courtroom.
Negotiation-communication for the purpose of persuasion-is the pre-eminent mode of dispute
resolution. Compared to processes using mutual third parties, it has the advantage of allowing
the parties themselves to control the process and the solution.

In India, Negotiation doesn’t have any statutory recognition. Negotiation is self counseling
between the parties to resolve their dispute. Negotiation is a process that has no fixed rules
but follows a predictable pattern.

LOK ADALAT

Lok Adalat generally means the people’s court. It is not a court in strict sense of term, nut it
is a forum where voluntary efforts are made for settlement of disputes between the parties. In
other words, Lok Adalat is a forum of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). This system
based on gandhian principles. It provides alternative resolution or devise for expedious and
inexpensive justice.

Lok Adalat was a historic necessity in a country like India where illiteracy dominated other
aspects of governance. It was introduced in 1982 and the first Lok Adalat was initiated in
Gujarat. The evolution of this movement was a part of the strategy to relieve heavy burden on
courts with pending cases. It was the conglomeration of concepts of social justice, speedy
justice, conciliated result and negotiating efforts. They cater the need of weaker sections of
society. It is a suitable alternative mechanism to resolve disputes in place of litigation.

Lok Adalats have assumed statutory recognition under the Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987. These are being regularly organized primarily by the State Legal Aid and the Advice
Boards with the help of District Legal Aid and Advice Committees.

With the advent of the alternate dispute resolution, there is new avenue for the people to
settle their disputes. The settlement of disputes in Lok Adalat quickly has acquired good
popularity among the public and this has really given rise to a new force to ADR and this will
no doubt reduce the pendency in law Courts. There is an urgent need for justice dispensation
through ADR mechanisms. The ADR movement needs to be carried forward with greater
speed. This will considerably reduce the load on the courts apart from providing instant
justice at the door-step, without substantial cost being involved. If they are successfully given
effect then it will really achieve the goal of rendering social justice to the parties to the
dispute.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi