Alternative Dispute Resolution– Should You Go For It?
As ADR has always been a popular option, it begs the question why it is popular and why others do not turn to it. Why is the court still an entity many turn to if ADR is readily available? As with any institution there are pros and cons to them . No structure is perfectly sound in all their proceedings and judgments. Therefore, in this article we explore why ADR is a good option and what the negatives are, too. As an individual who may be looking for a body to oversee legal proceedings you need to ensure that you choose with caution, as this can reduce the waste of time, money and resources. Consider all your options before you turn to either the court or to ADR. It is a choice to be weighed carefully, even if you seek expedited arbitration.
Pros Of ADR
It Is Cheaper And Quicker
Unlike litigation, which can extend over several months to set a court date and to actually get through proceedings, ADR offers quicker options for the disputing parties. It is a fast alternative, one that is less costly, compared to court. Attorneys come with large fees for their consultations and their services, while for mediation, arbitration or adjudication the fees are smaller. This is also due to the fact that the proceedings in ADR are done faster over a month or two. This means that proceedings are kept short and easy to get through.
It Is Confidential And Awards Some Control
The proceedings in ADR are confidential. Everyone involved in the case is sworn to the secrecy of the proceedings to maintain confidentiality. This includes the parties, the decision-maker and any other bodies present. There is also some control, as the parties get to decide who their decision maker will be. There is room for further negotiation and talking over proceedings to come to a better conclusion for the parties. This is different from court where proceedings are often open to the public.
Cons Of ADR
It Is Done With Limited Evidence And Power Differences May Sway The Verdict
For ADR to work efficiently, it works in a way that provides limited evidence. Their thoroughness does not compare to that of the court and litigation when sifting through it. Furthermore the power differences of the parties may bring about unfairness. For instance, a big corporation has more power over a small-time grocery store owner. Furthermore, while the court allows for appeals, in ADR the verdict given is often final without room for appeal.
Quality And Pay Out Are Not That Big
The quality of negotiations is not consistent and the pay-out is often smaller than required, if payouts are part of the proceedings and the conclusion drawn. Therefore, while ADR may be cheaper, in essence you lose money by settling for ADR and not litigation