Courts are an essential institution without which society would end up in chaos.

Their
importance cannot be emphasized enough, though many of the disputes which arise
between individuals or organizations are such that, they are solvable without the interference
of the judicial authorities. Such conflicts, which do not require the juridical system, instead,
need a specific set of formal regulations to achieve their end. Dispute resolution resolves the
conflicts that occur amongst individuals or organization. In turn, the judicial burden is
reduced.
Alternative Dispute Resolution often referred to as ADR, is a set of methods or techniques
that allow parties to a dispute to reach an amicable settlement. It consists of ways in which
parties can settle their differences without recourse to litigation. Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) methods are now widely accepted and have been gaining recognition at
the national as well as international level. Modes of ADR have been in existence from a long
time and were used long before the sophistication of civilization.

ADR involves continuous efforts made by a third party, who is neutral and assists the
disputing parties to come to a settlement. The qualification and the skill of the neutral third
party vary, concerning the modes of dispute resolution. In simple words, ADR, as the name
suggests, is nothing but an alternative method to litigation to resolve disputes that exist
between individuals or organizations.

Nowadays, due to the vast resources required for litigation, people prefer alternative dispute
resolution methods to settle matters which do not require the intervention of judicial authority.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to any means of settling disputes outside the
Court Room.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to a variety of processes that help parties to
resolve disputes without a trial.

Definition
The process by which disputes between the parties are settled or brought to an amicable
result without the intervention of Judicial Institution and without any trial is known as
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR.
ADR offers to resolve all type of matters including civil, commercial, industrial and family etc.,
where people are not being able to start any type of negotiation and reach the settlement.
Generally, ADR uses neutral third party who helps the parties to communicate, discuss the
differences and resolve the dispute.
It is a method which enables individuals and group to maintain co-operation, social order and
provides opportunity to reduce hostility.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to any means of setting disputes outside of the
Court Room.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to a variety of processes that help parties to
resolve disputes without a trial.

Definition
The process by which disputes between the parties are settled or brought to an amicable
result without the intervention of Judicial Institution and without any trail is known as
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR.
ADR offers to resolve all type of matters including civil, commercial, industrial and family etc.,
where people are not being able to start any type of negotiation and reach the settlement.
Generally, ADR uses neutral third party who helps the parties to communicate, discuss the
differences and resolve the dispute.
It is a method which enables individuals and group to maintain co-operation, social order and
provides opportunity to reduce hostility.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms

ADR is a mechanism of dispute resolution that is non adversarial, i.e. working together
co-operatively to reach the best resolution for everyone.
ADR can be instrumental in reducing the burden of litigation on courts, while delivering a
well-rounded and satisfying experience for the parties involved.
It provides the opportunity to "expand the pie" through creative, collaborative bargaining, and
fulfill the interests driving their demands.

Types of ADR
Arbitration
The dispute is submitted to an arbitral tribunal which makes a decision (an "award") on the
dispute that is mostly binding on the parties.
It is less formal than a trial, and the rules of evidence are often relaxed.
Generally, there is no right to appeal an arbitrator's decision.
Except for some interim measures, there is very little scope for judicial intervention in the
arbitration process.

Conciliation
A non-binding procedure in which an impartial third party, the conciliator, assists the parties
to a dispute in reaching a mutually satisfactory agreed settlement of the dispute.
Conciliation is a less formal form of arbitration.
The parties are free to accept or reject the recommendations of the conciliator.
However, if both parties accept the settlement document drawn by the conciliator, it shall be
final and binding on both.

Mediation
In mediation, an impartial person called a "Mediator" helps the parties try to reach a mutually
acceptable resolution of the dispute.
The mediator does not decide the dispute but helps the parties communicate so they can try
to settle the dispute themselves.
Mediation leaves control of the outcome with the parties.

Negotiation
A non-binding procedure in which discussions between the parties are initiated without the
intervention of any third party with the object of arriving at a negotiated settlement to the
dispute.
It is the most common method of Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit organizations, government branches, legal
proceedings, among nations and in personal situations such as marriage, divorce, parenting,
and everyday life.

Lok Adalat
An interesting feature of the Indian legal system is the existence of voluntary agencies called
Lok Adalats (Peoples' Courts).
The Legal Services Authorities Act was passed in 1987 to encourage out-of-court
settlements, and
the new Arbitration and Conciliation Act was enacted in 1996.
Lok Adalat or "People's Court" comprises an informal setting which facilitates negotiations in
the presence of a judicial officer wherein cases are dispensed without undue emphasis on
legal technicalities.
The order of the Lok-Adalat is final and shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and
shall be binding on the parties to the dispute.
The order of the Lok-Adalat is not appealable in a court of law

Importance of ADR In India

To deal with the situation of pendency of cases in courts of India, ADR plays a significant
role in India by its diverse techniques.
Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism provides scientifically developed techniques to
Indian judiciary which helps in reducing the burden on the courts.
ADR provides various modes of settlement including, arbitration, conciliation, mediation,
negotiation and lok Adalat. Here, negotiation means self-counseling between the parties to
resolve their dispute but it doesn’t have any statutory recognition in India.
ADR is also founded on such fundamental rights, article 14 and 21 which deals with equality
before law and right to life and personal liberty respectively.
ADR’s motive is to provide social-economic and political justice and maintain integrity in the
society enshrined in the preamble.
ADR also strive to achieve equal justice and free legal aid provided under Article 39-A
relating to Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP).
ADR has proven successful in clearing the backlog of cases in various levels of the judiciary
–
Lok Adalats alone have disposed more than 50 lakh cases every year on average in the last
three years.
But there seems to be a lack of awareness about the availability of these mechanisms.
The National and State Legal Services Authorities should disseminate more information
regarding these, so they become the first option explored by potential litigants.

ARTICLE

Follow this topic

Ask a Question
Print this Article
Translate this page
United Arab Emirates: Comparative Analysis Of ADR Methods With Focus On Their
Advantages And Disadvantages
05 February 2019
by STA Law Firm (Dubai)
STA Law Firm
Your LinkedIn Connections
with the authors
"The courts of this country should not be the places where the resolution of disputes begins.
They should be the places where the disputes end after alternative methods of resolving
disputes have been considered and tried." -Sandra Day O'Connor

Courts are an essential institution without which society would end up in chaos. Their
importance cannot be emphasized enough, though many of the disputes which arise
between individuals or organizations are such that, they are solvable without the interference
of the judicial authorities. Such conflicts, which do not require the juridical system, instead,
need a specific set of formal regulations to achieve their end. Dispute resolution resolves the
conflicts that occur amongst individuals or organization. In turn, the judicial burden is
reduced.

In this article, we will analyze the types of ADR methods while focusing on their advantages,
disadvantages, and differences.

Alternative Dispute Resolution often referred to as ADR, is a set of methods or techniques

that allow parties to a dispute to reach an amicable settlement. It consists of ways in which
parties can settle their differences without recourse to litigation. Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) methods are now widely accepted and have been gaining recognition at
the national as well as international level. Modes of ADR have been in existence from a long
time and were used long before the sophistication of civilization.

ADR involves continuous efforts made by a third party, who is neutral and assists the
disputing parties to come to a settlement. The qualification and the skill of the neutral third
party vary, concerning the modes of dispute resolution.

ADR is a vast topic and includes a broad range of activities. Legal luminaries Nancy Atlas,
Stephen Huber, and Wendy Trachte in their 'Alternative Dispute Resolution: The Litigator's
Handbook,' has defined ADR as being:

"Anything except a bench or jury trial under the auspices of some judicial body."
In simple words, ADR, as the name suggests, is nothing but an alternative method to
litigation to resolve disputes that exist between individuals or organizations.

Nowadays, due to the vast resources required for litigation, people prefer alternative dispute
resolution methods to settle matters which do not require the intervention of judicial authority.

Methods of Alternative Dispute Resolution System

The techniques or modes of ADR, though widely accepted all over the world, may vary from
region to region. This fluctuation depends on the legal framework of a country. The following
are the methods of settlement that are widely accepted:

Arbitration
Mediation
Conciliation
Negotiation
Arbitration
Arbitration is a mode of ADR wherein the dispute between the parties goes through a
process to achieve an amicable resolution by an impartial third party known as an 'arbitrator,'
without recourse to litigation. In the case of arbitration, the arbitrator, after reviewing the
dispute between the parties comes to a settlement. Such a decision taken by an arbitrator
shall be binding on both parties. Unlike other methods of dispute resolution, once the parties
have submitted a matter to arbitration, neither can withdraw from the procedure.

Arbitration can either be voluntary or mandatory. In the case of compulsory arbitration, the
parties to the dispute enter into Arbitration either under a statute, an order of the court, or
through a specific clause included in the contractual agreement between the parties.
Whereas on the other hand, in the case of voluntary arbitration, it is up to the discretion of
parties to enter into arbitration. The decision that results from the proceeding is known as an
'arbitral award.'

Advantages of arbitration:
Flexibility- Arbitration proceedings are flexible and more economically feasible compared to
litigation.
Time-Consuming- Arbitration proceedings occur at an expeditious rate as compared to
Litigation; therefore, it saves time for both parties.
Confidentiality- The disputes which are subject to arbitration are treated with privacy, and are
not released to the public.
Arbitrator- The parties have the liberty to choose an arbitrator to handle their dispute.
Enforceability- Arbitration awards are generally easier to enforce as compared to court
verdicts.
Disadvantages of arbitration:
If arbitration is mandatory as per the contract between the parties, then their right to
approach the court is waived.
There is a very limited avenue for appeals.
Arbitration does not provide for the grant of interlocutory applications.
Arbitration awards are not directly enforceable; they are executable subject to judicial
sanction.
Mediation
Mediation is a mode of dispute resolution, where an amicable decision arises with the help of
a third party known as a 'mediator,' without recourse to the court of law. It is a voluntary
process, and unlike arbitration, it is more flexible; therefore, the parties to the dispute are
under no obligation to agree to the settlement. Thus, an agreement taken via mediation shall
be binding upon the parties, only as long as they agree to it. There may be instances where
parties are advised to adhere to Mediation, however, under such circumstances, the result is
up to the parties. Therefore, Mediation is a process where the parties are in total control over
their final settlement. Here, the mediator only acts as a facilitator and does not interfere in
the decision of the dispute. Therefore, it is a win-win pact.

Advantages of mediation:
Parties have complete control over the settlement.
Less stress as compared to litigation and arbitration.
The relationship between the parties isn't overly damaged.
Mediation proceedings are confidential.
The process resolves the dispute quickly.
Disadvantages of mediation:
Since the decision is at the discretion of the parties, there is the possibility that a settlement
between the parties may not arise.
It lacks the support of any judicial authority in its conduct.
The absence of formality- Mediation proceedings are lacking in any procedural formality
since they are not based on any legal principle.
The truth of an issue may not be revealed.
Conciliation
Conciliation is a method of dispute resolution wherein the parties to a dispute come to a
settlement with the help of a conciliator. The conciliator meets with the parties both together
and separately to enter into an amicable agreement. Here, the final decision may be taken
by reducing tensions, improving communications, and adopting other methods. It is a flexible
process, therefore allowing the parties to define the content and purpose of the proceeding.
It is risk-free and is not binding upon the parties unless they sign it.

Advantages of conciliation:
Flexibility: Since the conciliation process is informal, it is flexible.
The conciliator is often an expert in the disputed field.
Conciliation proceedings, like any other form of ADR, is economical as compared to
litigation.
The parties to the dispute have the liberty to approach the court of law, if unsatisfied with the
proceeding.
Disadvantages of conciliation:
The process is not binding upon the parties to the dispute.
There is no avenue for appeal.
The parties may not achieve a settlement to their conflict.
Negotiation
Negotiation is a method of dispute resolution whereby a dispute between two individuals or
groups is settled amicably by an impartial third person called as a negotiator, using different
techniques. The negotiator, in this form of resolution, uses various communication methods
to bring the parties of the dispute to a settlement. The primary aim of this type of dispute
resolution is to reach an agreement that is fair and acceptable by the parties. The parties
engage in the dispute with each other until they reach a desirable outcome for all involved.

Advantages of Negotiation:
Flexibility: since negotiation is an informal process, it is relatively flexible.
Quick resolutions as compared to litigation.
It facilitates in maintaining a healthy relationship between the disputing parties.
Takes place in a private environment
Disadvantages of Negotiation:
The parties to the dispute may not come to a settlement.
Lack of legal protection of the parties to the conflict.
Imbalance of power between the parties is possible in negotiation.