Alternative Resolution Mechanisms Research Articles

THE EFFECTIVENESS AND VALUE OF USING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS TO PREVENT OR RESOLVE LABOR DISPUTES AT AN EARLY STAGE

The development of effective mechanisms for the prevention and/or alternative resolution of labor disputes is one of the challenges of the Labor Code of Georgia. It should be noted that in 2020, in order to bring the legislation closer to the recommendations and standards of the International Labor Organization (ILO), as well as to the directives of the European Union, a number of changes were made to the Labor Code of Georgia, including regarding the prevention and/or alternative resolution of labor disputes. Despite the changes, the issue of the effective use of labor dispute prevention and/or alternative resolution mechanisms in practice is still questionable. The article discusses the mechanisms of prevention and/or alternative resolution of labor disputes provided by the Labor Code of Georgia. The existing legislative gap in this direction is highlighted. Based on the review of international legislation, effective mechanisms for the prevention and/or alternative resolution of labor disputes are proposed.

Providing a Balance between Employers’ and Employees’ Interests through the Development of a Procedural Mechanism for Protecting Their Rights

Background: This article presents a study of the theoretical and practical aspects of balancing the interests of employers and employees in the context of Kazakhstan and the United States. The core purpose was to develop such mechanisms that can aid in balanced employer-employee relations in Kazakhstan. The article analyses the role of legal codes and frameworks for the elimination of imbalance in disputed employment relations. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted and the relevant legislation, codes and extant literature related to the rights of employees and employers were explored, which included ILO documents and relevant research articles. The article investigates Kazakhstan’s and United States’ labour code and legislation to determine the applicable procedural mechanisms for balancing the interests of employers and employees. Results and Conclusions: On the basis of this study, a number of recommendations have been developed, aimed at protecting the interests of both employers and employees. In particular, the article presents a procedural developed mechanism based on three aspects of employment relations: social dialogue, collective bargaining and dispute resolution aimed at securing the rights and interests of both parties. The developed mechanisms not only facilitate mutually beneficial decisions appealing to the interests of employees and employers via social dialogue and collective bargaining agreements but also aim to reduce the number of labour disputes in the courts in the future with alternative resolution mechanisms.

The potentials and limitations of tax dispute prevention and alternative resolution mechanisms

This paper deals with prevention and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in tax matters, particularly in the light of the specific nature of administrative relations, which also include tax procedures. Given the involvement of stakeholders, ADR benefits both the taxpayers and the tax authority, enabling greater legal certainty and speedier finalisation of procedures. Yet, ADR also poses an open threat to the public interest and equality as international and constitutional administrative principles, and must therefore be limited in tax procedures. This also derives from the legal acts of the EU and the Council of Europe. In addition to theoretical frameworks and types of dispute prevention and resolution mechanisms studied by means of scientific literature review, legal sources analysis and comparative insights, the paper presents the Slovenian regulation and practice of the Financial Administration (FURS) over the past years. The aim of this research is to examine the de iure and de facto situation at the national level. The analysis shows that, in tax matters, ADR is noticeably more intensive at the international level than within national tax systems. On the other hand, individual countries prefer to establish regulatory mechanisms for prevention, which should result in even more desired avoidance of disputes. It can be concluded that efficient tax procedures require an integrated approach, including both dispute prevention and ADR, in order to ensure the principles of tax justice and systemic inclusion of all stakeholders in its governance.

Identification of latent legal knowledge in differing site condition (DSC) litigations

Abstract Conflicts in construction projects have always been a major problem. Unless an alternate resolution mechanism is spelled out in the contract, these disputes are typically resolved in court, which might be time consuming and financially substantial. This paper represents a continuation in a research focused on creating robust methodologies for legal decision support within the construction industry. Consequently, this papers tackles the problem of automating the extraction of implicit knowledge about significant legal factors upon which verdicts of Differing Site Condition (DSC) litigations are based. To that end, the research methodology (1) utilized a set of 600 cases from the Federal Court of New York; (2) adopted 15 legal concepts that have been found to be statistically significant for DSC litigations; (3) implemented 4 weighing mechanism for data representation, namely Term Frequency, Logarithmic Term Frequency, Augmented Term Frequency, and Term Frequency Inverse Document Frequency; and (4) employed Machine Learning (ML) classifiers, namely Naive Bayes, Decision Tree, and PART for the development of 12 prediction models. Among the finding of this study (1) ML classifiers present a suitable solution for the analyzed task; and (2) Naive Bayes classifiers achieved the highest prediction accuracy of 88%.

Interbank contagion and resolution procedures: inspecting the mechanism

This paper develops a network model of a stylized banking system in which banks are connected to one another through interbank claims, which allows us to study the diffusion of default avalanches triggered by an exogenous shock under a number of different assumptions on the degree of interconnectedness, level of capitalization, liquidity buffers, the size of the interbank market and fire-sales. We expand upon the existing literature by comparing two alternative resolution mechanisms: (i) liquidations triggered by either illiquidity or insolvency-related distress implying asset sales and compensation of creditors; and (ii) a bail-in mechanism avoiding bank closure by forcing a recapitalization provided by bank creditors. Our model speaks to how contagion dynamics unravel via illiquidity-driven defaults in the first case and higher-order losses in the latter one. Within this framework, we show how the liquidity risk externality can be resolved, and we put forward a macro-criterion to assess the adequacy of the liquidity ratio introduced with Basel III.

Interbank Contagion and Resolution Procedures: Inspecting the Mechanism

This paper develops a network model of a stylized banking system in which banks are connected to one another through interbank claims, which allows us to study the diffusion of default avalanches triggered by an exogenous shock under a number of different assumptions on the degree of interconnectedness, level of capitalization, liquidity buffers, the size of the interbank market and fire-sales. We expand upon the existing literature by embedding two alternative resolution mechanisms. First, liquidations triggered by either illiquidity or insolvency-related distress implying asset sales and compensation of creditors. Second, a bail-in mechanism avoiding bank closure by forcing a recapitalization provided by bank creditors. Our model speaks to how contagion dynamics unravel via illiquidity-driven defaults in the first case and higher-order losses in the latter one. Within this framework, we show how counter-party liquidity risk externality can be resolved and put forward a macro-criterion to assess the adequacy of the liquidity ratio introduced with Basel III.

On International Arbitrations for the Settlement of Boundary Maritime Delimitation Disputes and Disputes from Joint Development Agreements for the Exploitation of Offshore Natural Resources

The availability of technology for the exploitation of resources originating from the sea bed, as well as the need to define the boundaries of national jurisdiction, has resulted in an increase in coastal states’ claims over adjacent maritime areas. The primary mechanism used for the resolution of issues concerning disputed maritime boundary delimitation areas is negotiation; nevertheless, alternative resolution mechanisms, i.e., litigation in state court and arbitration, are at times also chosen for the resolution of such disputes. This article critically discusses the procedure of international arbitration for the settlement of maritime boundary delimitation disputes and disputes arising from joint development agreements for the exploitation of offshore natural resources. It is shown that in the resolution of such disputes, arbitration offers even more advantages than litigation in state court; e.g., it offers a relatively higher degree of control over the composition and control of the arbitral tribunal, a relatively shorter and quicker duration of the proceedings and, not least, closed and private proceedings.