Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures Research Articles

The legal policy in fostering the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures

The complications of social relations contribute to the growth of the number of disputes that result from conflict situations. In these conditions, the role of the state’s legal policy, aimed at stimulating the participants of social relations to choose economical, efficient, and prompt methods of conflict resolution, is significantly increasing. Improving the quality of dispute resolution directly correlates with a drop in the number of cases pending before a judge. This is achievable only through the development of the mechanisms of pre-trial dispute resolution and conciliation procedures. This paper aims to study legal issues and perspectives on the development of alternative dispute resolution based on the analysis of the legal policy of the Russian Federation. To achieve the mentioned goal, comparative legal analysis, a systemic approach, and formal-juridical methods were used to show the current developments of the legal policy of the Russian Federation in the sphere of stimulating and incentivizing alternative dispute resolution. Authors concluded that, unlike the domestic legal order, in foreign states, there is not only a formed normative basis for the procedures of alternative dispute resolution but also political acts of stimulating tone, designed to actively involved in these procedures more and more participants of social relations in a state of conflict. It has been established that the legal policy on introducing alternative dispute resolution procedures in foreign legal orders is characterized by a shifted emphasis on family law.

Can Artificial Intelligence and Modern Technologies Address the Common Issues of Consumer Online Dispute Resolution in the EU?

The article examines the current status of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in the European Union, explicitly evaluating its advantages and disadvantages. In addition to examining the evolution of the ODR mechanisms, the author sheds light on the challenges encountered in their implementation, such as concerns about trust, transparency, and accessibility. Moreover, this analysis investigated the potential implications of artificial intelligence and contemporary technologies on the transformation of the EU’s consumer ODR framework. The ADR/ODR system of the EU has been subject to criticism for several weaknesses, including inconsistent implementation, insufficient supervision, and the lack of mandatory participation for traders. The lack of a specialised supervisory mechanism has also led to shortcomings in the oversight process. The Directive does not impose a requirement for traders to participate in ADR procedures; nevertheless, there exists significant heterogeneity in the regulations that govern these procedures. The lack of binding enforcement for final decisions arises from the requirement of Member States to agree upon and acknowledge the mechanisms for recognition and implementation. The EU ODR Platform operates as a mechanism for referring cases to ADR bodies. Nevertheless, the entity in question does not actively participate in the resolution of disputes based on their substantive merits, and its jurisdiction is primarily limited to smaller entities. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to enhance transparency, objectivity, and legitimacy within online dispute resolution systems, thereby potentially giving rise to a two-tier system. The author suggests that in order to bring about significant legislative changes, it is necessary to incorporate certain provisions. These provisions should mandate the enforcement of decisions made in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes for consumers and also facilitate the seamless integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into this system. Otherwise, it is unlikely that AI will substantially impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the EU ADR/ODR system, as its primary challenges are rooted in areas beyond the scope of AI, such as the enforcement of decisions.

The Role of ADR in Resolving Disputes Related to Medical Negligence

In today’s fast-paced world, a rapid rise in instances of Medical Negligence has been observed since the last decade. Cases of Medical Negligence happen when healthcare practitioners like doctors, and nurses, or when any hospital deviates from its standard duty of care, the consequence of which results in harm and injury to a patient. Due to the failure of medical professionals to exercise due care, individuals and their families may pursue recompense for the injuries suffered as a result of the misconduct and negligence exhibited by doctors, nurses, or other healthcare practitioners. The disputes related to medical negligence are generally settled by the traditional justice system i.e., Litigation which involves appearing before the Hon’ble Court and having a Judge decide on a particular dispute in question. In light of the protracted and costly nature of our nation’s legal system, which often yields results that may not meet the parties’ desired outcomes, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms, including arbitration and mediation, have emerged as prominent approaches for resolving medical malpractice disputes involving healthcare practitioners. These ADR procedures are currently considered as feasible alternatives to the extended and expensive litigation procedure. ADR mechanism enables disputing parties to let them resolve their disagreements outside the court in a more cooperative as well as efficient manner. A mediator is a neutral third party that encourages conversation between opposing parties and eventually assists them in reaching an equitable settlement agreed upon by both disputing parties. In contrast, a neutral third person, known as an arbitrator, participates in the arbitration court and listens to the evidence of the parties engaged in the dispute before making a binding judgment on the case’s conclusion.

Alternative dispute resolution procedures in the system of legal forms of environmental conflict resolution

In this study, an analysis of the legal mechanisms for the settlement of environmental-legal conflicts was carried out, taking into account the peculiarities of environmental legal relations and the environmental-legal regulation of these relations. The effectiveness of the application of traditional forms of dispute resolution - judicial and administrative - based on the resolution of disputes based on the law, and alternative mechanisms based on the principle of conflict resolution by comparing and finding a balance between public, state and private interests is analyzed. A comparative analysis of these forms was carried out in terms of the effectiveness of solving environmental and legal conflicts.It has been reasonably proven that the concept of sustainable development at the stage of ecoconflict settlement acquires a practical embodiment when conciliatory dispute resolution procedures are used. In this case, the result is compatible with the doctrine of sustainable development – a decision establishing the law, which to some extent reflects the interests of each of the parties to the conflict. It has been proven that such a law-making decision can be based on consensus (if the parties eventually adopted a decision that partially reflects the interest of each and an agreement was reached on the essence of the conflict) or compromise (the decision is based on understanding the essence of the problem, taking into account the interests, but not in full measure on its solution).It was concluded that it is necessary to develop consensual forms of environmental conflict resolution in national law enforcement practice, which should become a full-fledged alternative to judicial, administrative and other jurisdictional forms of dispute resolution. It is time to form an independent legal institute of environmental law, which will specialize in the settlement of environmental and legal conflicts, and will contribute to the introduction of an effective mechanism for managing environmental conflicts with maximum consideration of the legitimate socially acceptable interests of all participants.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): A Suitable Broad Based Dispute Resolution Model in Nigeria; Challenges and Prospects.

Purpose: Due to the flaws in the traditional judicial system, the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods is gaining popularity among scholars and lawyers around the world. Most scholarly articles have examined the inherent advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques over the traditional judicial processes for resolving different types of conflict. Despite the increasing frequency and classification of conflicts in Nigeria, little research has been conducted on the reasons for, and barriers to, disputants' use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems as viable options. Given the complexity of the nature and structure of disputes in Nigeria, this research delves into the factors that push and pull litigants into the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
 Methodology: This study utilized an explanatory research approach to investigate the many distinctive kinds of conflicts and match them with the most relevant ADR procedures. In particular, property disputes, family conflicts, and business disagreements were investigated. 
 Findings: According to the findings, Alternative Dispute resolution (ADR) may lead to a considerable reduction in the amount of time and expense of the dispensation of justice that addresses unfairness in the system of criminal justice administration, ultimately resulting in positive social change.
 Contributions to Theory, Policy and Practice: The study concludes that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes have significant potentials for handling the growing number of disputes. However, it is necessary to address their shortcomings as well as facilitate collaboration between the practitioners and the regular courts. It would improve social stability and guarantee satisfaction for the perpetrator, the victim, the community, and society as a whole if this were done. The study recommended, among other things, that the general public and litigants be educated on the inherent advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the resolution of conflicts.

REFORMS TO BE MADE IN ADR LAWS- A COMPARITIVE STUDY WITH UK LAWS

Due to its quicker and more effective alternative to the traditional court system, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has grown in significance within India's legal system. The current ADR legislation in India were passed more than 20 years ago, and since then, they have undergone some changes. However, in order to address the current issues the ADR system is facing, further extensive reforms are required. This essay examines the current ADR rules in India, examines the difficulties the system faces, and contrasts them with the UK's ADR legislation. The report makes suggestions for ADR legislative amendments in India based on the UK model. The report emphasises the necessity for strengthening the Indian ADR system to increase its effectiveness because it is still in its infancy. The ADR system has difficulties such as inadequate training of ADR practitioners, low public awareness of the ADR system, and the requirement for an efficient enforcement mechanism. The article makes the case that India's ADR regulations could be improved by using the UK model as a model. The ADR system in the UK is more extensive, with many ADR mechanisms that are well-regulated and have explicit standards on the education and training requirements for ADR practitioners. The study concludes by advising India to implement extensive reforms to strengthen its ADR laws. The suggested reforms include broadening the use of ADR procedures, creating a governing organisation for ADR practitioners, establishing minimal requirements for the education and experience of ADR practitioners, and creating a strong enforcement system. India can enhance the efficiency and efficacy of its ADR system by adopting the UK model of ADR laws. This will assist to decrease the backlog of cases in the courts, provide timely justice to litigants, and lessen the strain on the judiciary.

Secular Court-Ordered Divorces: What Modern Fatāwā and Canadian Imams Say

AbstractMany Canadian Muslim couples are hesitant to resort to civil legal processes and attempt to resolve their disputes within the religious community. Islamic law’s exclusion of non-Muslim judges from holding judicial authority in certain family law matters limits the feasibility of aligning religious commands with family court orders. By extrapolating contemporary legal opinions (fatāwā, sing. fatwā) issued by institutions and narrating experiences of Canadian imams, this article documents the views of both researchers and practitioners, finding that neither holds secular court-ordered divorces contested by the husband to suffice as a form of Islamic marriage dissolution. This article concludes that both Canadian imams and fatwā-issuing bodies call for the development of extra-judicial entities that apply Islamic law’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures in a manner recognized by secular authorities.

A practical guide to filing domain name complaints

This article first provides an overview of the background and functioning of different domain name dispute resolution procedures before providing tips and tricks for practitioners to make more efficient use of these procedures. These tips and tricks not only relate to the procedure itself but also to writing a clear and concise domain name complaint. This article is limited to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures and will not discuss the case law of ordinary courts on domain names. The main focus of this article is the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), the world’s most important domain name dispute resolution policy. Given the background of the authors, who are based in the Netherlands, the UDRP is mainly compared to policies that play a role in Dutch, Benelux and European practice. Many cybercriminals cleverly use official-looking domain names that are slightly different from the official domain name (and trade mark), through which they can impersonate the trade mark owner. The scams associated with impersonations are numerous. Scammers frequently provide instructions for payment to a finance department while using email addresses purporting to relate to the manager (CEO fraud). In the Port of Rotterdam, there are many cases of so-called terminal spoofing: scammers pretend to be the owner of a tank terminal and send emails to foreign parties in which they offer oil in return for a deposit. The same domain name that is used for the email address is often linked to a website that purports to be the official website of a specific tank terminal, including pictures of the tank storage and the actual address. It often results in the actual tank terminal owner, unaware of what has happened, having to deal at the gate of the terminal with angry and deceived buyers.2

DECISION SUPPORTING FLOW CHART FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Construction projects usually are susceptible to conflicts because of their complexity. Additionally, the involvement of different stakeholders pursuing different aims and implementing them by different means, often results in disputable situations that must be solved. The existence of several dispute resolution procedures with various advantages and disadvantages makes it difficult to select the most suitable one for solving the particular conflict. Not every method seems appropriate for resolution of each type of dispute. Litigation may take a long time and incurs substantial cost. However, conflict parties seldom choose alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures such as adjudication, mediation and conciliation. Based on literature research and the analysis of several surveys, the authors identified a massive knowledge deficit of construction industry regarding the details of ADR procedures. The authors conclude that deeper knowledge about pros and cons of the various dispute resolution methods can help construction companies with their decision for a suitable way of conflict settlement. The paper provides information about a decision supporting chart for choosing the appropriate dispute resolution measure. That decision supporting tool, developed by the authors, primarily shall assist smaller and mid-size construction companies, normally not having easy access to legal advice, in deciding for a dispute resolution strategy.

Alternative Dispute Resolution of Insurance Disputes According to Law on Consumer Protection

Introduction of mandatory mediation for professionals is one of the most important legal novelties of Law on consumer protection (2021). But the range of above-mentioned change could be assessed only when it is borne in mind that there are areas in which the sector governing alternative dispute resolution does not apply. Financial services are one of them. Central bank of Serbia passed a bylaw which regulated it in more details alternative dispute resolution procedures in the field of insurance. The author is dealing with the issue of justification of exemption of insurance sector from mandatory mediation. Whether such a solution will contribute to the improvement of consumer protection in the mediation process? Or the insurance sector will continue to languish in the dark? Whether insurance is really so „special“ that it deserves the privilege of exemption? Or it is in fact discrimination of insurance, which in the long run affects consumers of insurance services.

CONCILIATION PROCEDURES IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN KAZAKHSTAN IN MODERN CONDITIONS

In this article, the author considers alternative ways to resolve disputes, that is, the use of conciliation procedures to resolve conflict situations in civil proceedings. The traditional way of resolving disputes has been and remains the judicial procedure, which is enshrined in the legislation of most states and is a guarantee of respect for human and civil rights. But the author considers conciliation procedures for resolving a dispute in a civil process by concluding a settlement agreement. Also, special attention is paid to resolving the dispute through mediation. The previously existing types of alternative dispute resolution procedures have been supplemented by participatory procedure and judicial mediation.

DECISION SUPPORTING FLOW CHART FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Construction projects usually are susceptible to conflicts because of their complexity. Additionally, the involvement of different stakeholders pursuing different aims and implementing them by different means, often results in disputable situations that must be solved. The existence of several dispute resolution procedures with various advantages and disadvantages makes it difficult to select the most suitable one for solving the particular conflict. Not every method seems appropriate for resolution of each type of dispute. Litigation may take a long time and incurs substantial cost. However, conflict parties seldom choose alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures such as adjudication, mediation and conciliation. Based on literature research and the analysis of several surveys, the authors identified a massive knowledge deficit of construction industry regarding the details of ADR procedures. The authors conclude that deeper knowledge about pros and cons of the various dispute resolution methods can help construction companies with their decision for a suitable way of conflict settlement. The paper provides information about a decision supporting chart for choosing the appropriate dispute resolution measure. That decision supporting tool, developed by the authors, primarily shall assist smaller and mid-size construction companies, normally not having easy access to legal advice, in deciding for a dispute resolution strategy.

Competition between Family Law Contracts and Mediation Agreements Aimed at Regulating Family Law Disputes

The paper attempts to resolve the issues that arose in connection with the introduction in 2019 of amendments to the Federal Law «On Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure with the Participation of a Mediator (Mediation Procedure)" in terms of endowing a notarized mediation agreement with the force of an execution order: whether this agreement is capable of replacing a marriage contract, an agreement on the division of common property of spouses, an agreement on the payment of alimony, i.e. agreements subject to mandatory notarization. Also, the paper dwells on whether mediation agreements achieved in a dispute concerning the child’s place of residence and determining the order of communication of the child with a separate parent without transferring this dispute to the court after their notarization acquire the force of an execution order.According to the author, not every agreement adopted as part of the out-of-court mediation procedure can be attributed to mediation agreements subject to notary certification and having the force of an enforcement document. A marriage contract and an agreement on the division of common property of spouses concluded as a result of the outof-court mediation procedure, as well as an agreement on determining the place of residence of the child generating the personal non-property right of the parent, cannot constitute the content of a mediation agreement. A child support obligation cannot arise and cannot be enforced on the basis of a mediation agreement due to special rules concerning a single contractual basis for the emergence of a child support obligation (a child support agreement). A mediation agreement may not include conditions defining the procedure for exercising the rights of a parent living separately from a child protected by the power of enforcement.

Digitization of GLAM Collections and Copyright: Policy Paper

Abstract Copyright can be a major obstacle for cultural institutions regarding digitization and online accessibility, which ultimately leads to the under-exploitation of collections at the expense of society and to a need to support cultural heritage institutions with legislative and/or policy changes or at least clarifications. This contribution is a policy paper that aims to clarify the copyright law principles applicable to museum professionals dealing with digital cultural heritage worldwide, and to formulate policies to facilitate their digital activities. An initial version of this policy paper was published on a dedicated website and led to an international conference held in 2020 in Geneva. Although it is primarily addressed to museums, this policy paper may also serve as guidance to stakeholders in other areas dealing with digital cultural heritage, in particular Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums (GLAM). Part I proposes policies directed towards national and international policymakers. Parts II and III are directed towards cultural institutions, and set out a code of conduct that cultural institutions may follow when pursuing digitization and dissemination activities in order to comply with the actual state of the law and minimize the risks associated with these activities (Part II), and an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedure to help cultural institutions and rights holders identify issues and reach satisfactory solutions in disputes around digital activities (Part III).***

POSITION AND ROLE OF MEDIATOR IN THE MEDIATION PROCEDURE – AN COMPARATIVE OVERVIEW BETWEEN KOSOVO, ALBANIA, AND MONTENEGRO

The role of the mediator is essential in the implementation of the mediation procedure. Taking this fact into consideration, the laws of contemporary countries have paid special attention to specifying its position within this alternative dispute resolution procedure between the parties. The purpose of this study is to reflect the role of the mediator in the mediation procedure in Kosovo and ascertain the adaptability of Kosovo's legal solutions that address the mediator's position with the solutions of other Western Balkan countries, especially the relevant laws of Albania and Montenegro, countries with which Kosovo has multidimensional ties, but which, compared to Kosovo, are some steps ahead in the Euro-Atlantic integration processes. Furthermore, the results of this study suggest that the Law on Mediation of Kosovo should be amended concerning the role and conditions required for licensing mediators.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with Human Rights through European Legislation

The possibility that the court framework fills in as the essential stage for struggle settlement is disintegrating. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures will generally spread and become more formalized. These systems incorporate causing to notice ADR and arrangement-based ADR (like intercession and appeasement) (like intervention). Inquisitively, notwithstanding these turns of events, two significant issues relating to ADR and proportionate compromise stay muddled in international human rights law (IHRL). The main arrangement of inquiries concerns the equity norms expected by ADR/PDR (whether entered deliberately or compulsorily). The key part is the lawful prerequisites that might expect gatherings to a debate to utilize ADR/PDR rather than, or under the watchful eye of, going to court.

"ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND INDIVIDUAL LABOUR CONFLICTS: A DIFFERENT WAY OF MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL DISPUTES"

Organizational conflict as is considered legitimate and inevitable and may constitute a positive indicator of effective organizational management. This paper aims to analyse the legal provisions which establish the alternative dispute resolution methods and procedures regarding the individual labour conflicts through conciliation and mediation.

ВОЗНИКНОВЕНИЕ И РАЗВИТИЕ АЛЬТЕРНАТИВНЫХ СПОСОБОВ РАЗРЕШЕНИЯ СПОРОВ: НАЦИОНАЛЬНЫЙ И ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ

The article is determined to Alternative dispute resolution and their features. The system of out-of-court dispute resolution or alternative dispute resolution mechanisms - ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) - has existed in many foreign countries for many decades. The concept of ADR implies a wide range of dispute resolution mechanisms that do not duplicate litigation and are their alternative. The institute of alternative dispute resolution originates from ancient times. At certain periods of its historical development, various forms of dispute resolution arose in society, they represented a whole system of methods and procedures capable of resolving a conflict situation. The analysis of the emergence and development of the institute of alternative dispute resolution on the example of foreign countries (USA, Canada, India, Germany, Italy, Spain, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan) and Uzbekistan, as well as its current state, is carried out. The first special laws regulating alternative procedures are given. The United States as the first country to have various programs for the development of alternative dispute resolution procedures. The author has studied the application of alternative dispute resolution in Uzbekistan (mahalla, arbitration courts, mediation). Having analyzed the development of the ADR in Uzbekistan and in foreign countries, the author noted the features of this institute.

Проблемы процедуры медиации в гражданском судопроизводстве

Introduction: the paper discusses the actual problems of the legislation of the mediation procedure, as well as the existing obstacles to the development of civil practice in the application and improvement of the alternative dispute resolution procedure. The purpose of the paper is to study the problems of the institution of the mediation procedure, to understand the concept of conciliation procedures for further improving and forming recommendations for the efficiency of justice. In the process of consideration, the doctrinal problems, the formal-legal approach and the formallegal, systematic methods were used. Results: the study of the legislation allows us to identify the provisions that need to be improved and changed for a more active and complete implementation of the mediation procedure in public relations. Conclusions: the author identifies the ways to resolve such difficulties at the pre-trial stage to optimize the judicial burden. The dispute resolution procedure with the participation of a mediator is considered from the position of an effective alternative to judicial proceedings. It has a legislative consolidation, but there are a number of regulatory gaps that require solving a large number of tasks to improve them. It is necessary to carry out the extensive work in order to integrate this procedure into the civil and arbitration process: to develop a strategy for the systematic development of the mediation institute, to inform the public, the business community and practicing lawyers in order to introduce the procedure and develop the practice of application, and also, to solve the problem with the professional training of mediators and to encourage them to engage in this type of activity on a professional basis.

Doctrine of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Commercial Contract Particularly Mediation Clauses

The Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure provides an amicable settlement mechanism with the assistance of independent or so-called neutral professionals to resolve conflicts between the contracting parties. Alternative dispute resolution has become increasingly relevant in today’s world, and the number of agreements involving alternative dispute resolution provisions is steadily growing. Alternative dispute resolution is typically more efficient and time-saving than conventional court litigation, which is one of the causes for its development. The current research explores European Union mediation’s most common alternative dispute resolution strategy. It is mainly concerned with the mediation of legal and commercial conflicts. The research discusses European Union alternative dispute resolution patterns and associated requirements under the European Union statute, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation (2002), as well as other laws defined by alternative dispute resolution related organisations such as the International Chamber of Commerce and Effective Dispute Resolution Centre. It also draws parallels between the United States of America and the courts of some Member States of the European Union regarding alternative dispute resolution matters. Furthermore, it finds alternative dispute resolution in the sense of the right to adequate remedies (fundamental principle of the European Union). The study further explores the roots of alternative dispute resolution, its features and applicability, and the benefits of alternative dispute resolution over litigation/arbitration procedures, both of which tend to facilitate alternative dispute resolution’s broader use of business dispute resolution procedures. The qualitative research methodology will be applying for this research.