While members of the public have become familiar with settlements and trials, few people know a great deal about the alternative methods of dispute resolution. Those methods are alike in some respects, but also feature marked differences.
In what ways are arbitration and mediation similar?
Both of them belong in the class of ADRs. That means that each of them is an alternative method for dispute resolution (ADR). Either of them can get used as an alternative to negotiating a settlement or filing a lawsuit.
Neither arbitration nor mediation would get used to resolve a criminal case. Either one of those same ADRs might get used during efforts to resolve a civil case.
How do those 2 alternative methods differ from one another?
The arbitrators’ decision is binding. The parties affected by that decision have a limited chance to appeal. The legal system does not grant an appeal unless there is proof of corruption, fraud or serious misconduct on the part of any arbitrator.
Both parties must volunteer to take part in the mediation process. Consequently, both have the chance to appeal any agreement that might be reached through the utilization of that same process. Personal Injury Lawyer in Barrie know that as arbitrations proceed, the arbitrator(s) makes a careful study of the level of the plaintiff’s damages. Mediators take a different approach. Each of them strives to work with both sides, so that a mutually satisfactory settlement can be made.
The different approaches produce different endings. Arbitration’s ending consists of the imposition of a decision made by a single person or a board. Following mediation, there is no imposition of the mediated agreement, if the mediator has aided creation of an agreement. In the absence of any mutual understanding, the 2 sides can pursue one of 2 optional routes. When there has been no settlement, the disputing parties could decide to move forward with plans for a trial. Still, the legal system does not mandate the scheduling of a trial.
Indeed, the legal system would allow the scheduling of a 2nd mediation session. That option gets paired with the possibility of a trial, due to the nature of the mediation process. That process helps each side to gain a fuller appreciation for the case being made by the other side.
Indeed, trails that start after the disputing parties have taken part in a mediation session seldom end with the reading of a verdict. In a majority of those situations, the 2 sides reach some sort of settlement during the course of the courtroom proceedings, if not earlier. An attorney from either side might raise an objection, pushing both lawyers to consult with the judge. Consultations held within a judge’s chambers could pave the way for a settlement.