Menu Close


By Abhinaba Pal

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is basically a set of practices and methods that initially has the goal for the settlement of disputes outside the court without litigation. It is normally substantiated to elaborate arbitration, mediation, and a variety of processes in which a neutral third party to the dispute resolves the dispute without formal adjudication. These various alternatives to adjudication are established on various grounds. One of the potential benefits is that it reduces the transaction costs in the process of resolving disputes by alternative methods which is usually cheaper and faster than the ordinary judicial proceedings, the creation of resolutions that are better suited to the parties’ underlying interests and needs; and improved ex-post compliance with the terms of the resolution.
This article considers the determination of why facilitative forms of ADR have become so popular in many jurisdictions, and the nature of the ADR processes that have emerged. It provides essential background history for understanding ADR by concentrating on arbitration and mediation. With comparison of these processes of adjudication and negotiation – the two alternate procedures conventionally used to resolve legal disputes between the parties – the potential advantages and disadvantages of arbitration and mediation are briefly analyzed. A variety of hybrid processes often considered within the scope of ADR are briefly explained. These hybrids suggest that ADR procedures are frequently included as processes within a dispute resolution system that involves formal adjudication.


©2020- Lex Humanitariae: Journal for a Change