Alternative resolutions save time and money but they can

Alternative dispute resolution gives parties the opportunity to work through disputed issues with the help of a neutral third party.

It is generally faster and less expensive than going to court and there are multiple types including mediation, negotiation, arbitration, and collaborative law. Of the following the most beneficial and widely used forms are mediation and arbitration. . In favor of time management, a court system should require alternative dispute resolution prior to trial. There are a few reasons as to why requiring an alternative dispute resolution would benefit a court system.

One of the main reasons is that this process saves money and speeds settlements. Not all cases should be required to have an ADR, only small-scale ones including Family law, general civil, and possibly commercial law disputes do I think ADRs would benefit both parties equally. Under certain circumstances it should be a requirement for a case, regardless if parties want to participate in an ADR or not. Requiring alternative dispute resolutions should be enacted also to lower the amount of cases Judges have to see every day, also lowers the rate of workers that must come to jury duty, which in return could result in a more cost-effective approach. There are many benefits of alternative dispute resolutions. The main one that seems to be most important is that it saves individuals money and time.

Since it takes less time, the individuals disputing won’t have to take off many days of work, which could possibly represent a loss of money. Cost effective benefits of an ADR is non-existent lawyer fees which unquestionably add up over time. Not only do alternative dispute resolutions save time and money but they can also preserve and even sometimes improve relationships. This preserves relationships by helping people co-operate instead of creating one winner and one loser. Mediation is when a neutral 3rd person helps the parties reach a voluntary resolution of a dispute. Arbitration is less formal than a trial and the rules of evidence are often relaxed.

An arbitrator hears the evidence and arguments of the parties and then makes a written decision. Private arbitrators can charge for their time. The great thing about mediation is that it is informal and confidential. It can help people resolve civil, family, juvenile and other matters in a less adversary setting. Court mediation programs have been shown to save the parties time and money, improve satisfaction with the court’s services and reduce future dispute.

The mediator helps the parties to communicate better, explore legal options, and reach and acceptable solution to the problem that is why it is the better choice of the two.