Multi-door Courthouse Research Articles

Digital opportunities for promotion of multi-door Courthouse concept

The article presents the prospects and new horizons of realization of a multi-door courthouse concept concerning modern digitalization processes. The legal system of contemporary Russia, deprived of several ideological institutions of the Soviet-era past, faced the same problem, which was relevant for the U.S.A. when creating the multi-door courthouse concept. The procedural legislation in force up to October 2019, which provided the possibility of non-judicial forms of protection of rights since the codification of 2002, proved ineffective in creating a worthy alternative to the state judicial procedure for protecting rights. Ground has been established to introduce the multi-door courthouse concept into Russian realities in a new way: a digital multi-door courthouse. This paper analyzes the modern approach to a “multi-door courthouse” in the Russian Federation, addressing its evolution, current issues and future perspectives. To achieve the paper’s aim, the authors used comparative legal analysis to show the development of the concept in different countries and a systemic approach to study the implementation of a “multi-door courthouse” in the Russian Federation.

The Legal Possibilities of Arbitration After Litigation: An Analysis on the Court of Appeal Multi-Door Courthouse

The Legal Possibilities of Arbitration After Litigation: An Analysis on the Court of Appeal Multi-Door Courthouse

Speedy Dispensation of Justice: Lagos Multi-Door Court House (LMDC)

The Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse (LMDC) scheme is currently incorporated into the justice system. Since it was enacted into law, its relevance has developed due to its unique way of linking cases to appropriate forums for appropriate settlements. Hence, considerable literature has grown around its establishment; one such piece was on the scheme’s effectiveness, which was carried out in 2012. In hindsight, the work will evaluate the philosophy behind the birth of the Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse (LMDC) in Nigeria and the underlying elements of the LMDC Law. What is the story so far? Has the courthouse contributed to or reduced the pitfalls associated with litigation in Lagos state? The work employs a socio-legal and comparative approach. It concludes on how effective the LMDC has been from its inception to date, the differences or contributions they have brought in terms of speedy dispensation of justice. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Multi-Door Courthouse, Access to Justice, United States, United Kingdom; Nigeria.

A critical analysis of the inefficacy of Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) in South Africa – lessons from Nigeria

As a result of defects in the South African civil justice system, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development introduced voluntary court-annexed mediation (CAM) in the magistrates’ courts in 2014. CAM was chosen under the broader need for greater access to justice because it has the potential to make dispute resolution efficient, amicable, and affordable. It can, therefore, contribute to access to justice for all members of society. Since the amendment of the Magistrates’ Court Rules to provide for CAM, the uptake of mediation in terms of the CAM system has unfortunately been inadequate. The aim of this article is to identify reasons for the inefficacy of CAM since its implementation. We use normative research to critically analyse existing court rules and authority. We conclude that there are several reasons for CAM’s inefficacy which are elucidated in the main text. It is important to understand these reasons, as the legislature presents CAM as a mechanism to improve access to justice. From this platform, we evaluate the mechanisms for court-connected alternative dispute resolutions provided by the Nigerian Multi-Door Courthouse (MDC) system. This reveals policies and practices that could potentially improve the efficacy of CAM in South Africa, as these relate to the factors identified as impediments to the optimal functioning of CAM in our civil justice system. As such, we identify valuable lessons that can be learned from this comparison. Building hereon, and on the conclusions reached elsewhere in the article, we postulate that the mediation scheme, as contemplated by Rule 41A of the Uniform Rules of Court (as applied in the superior courts), should also be implemented in the magistrates’ courts. The article concludes that improving CAM in South Africa is of critical importance to advancing access to justice and departing from a culture of conventional adversarial dispute resolution.

Alternative Dispute Resolution in Nigeria: an Emerging Trend

This paper establishes the fact that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is evolving in Nigeria. It highlights the growing acceptance of ADR mechanisms for resolution of conflicts in the Nigerian legal system. It talks about the origin and development of the concept of ADR, Arbitration institutions, the “Multi-Door” Courthouse (MDC), the Negotiation & Conflict Management Group (NCMG), ADR agreements, application of ADR mechanisms, as well as the limitations on the use of ADR in Nigeria. In all, this research is an eyeopener to the benefits of ADR in Nigeria and seeks to encourage its full use in the country.

Access to Justice for People with Disability in Nigeria: Therapeutic Day Care Centre (TDCC) as a Case Study

Access to justice through the court system for non-disabled persons is trampled upon every day in Nigeria. One can then imagine the plight of the disabled persons most of whom live in abject poverty and constant discrimination from their respective families, religious congregation, educational sectors, Judicial practices and the ineffectiveness of the government policies, which clearly plummeted people’s confidence in the social justice system as well as the entire political structure. Against this backdrop, this study presents the findings of the analyses of these discriminations and Injustices; stemming from basic amenities to prevailing cultural vices, religious practices and lack of commitment on the part of the government. To attend and implement the needs of the disabled persons, which are hindrances to access to justice for the disabled persons in Nigeria. Thus this writer used Therapeutic Day Care Centre (TDCC) as a case study by interviewing the people that work with them as well as primary and secondary data. The conclusion points to the needs of these ‘special’ groups or disabled persons that were explicitly listed herein to be strictly adhered and for the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) to take a proactive stand to redress the lawful inadequacies so as to enhance their access to justice. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Multi-door courthouse; Litigation; Access to Justice; Disabled Person; Therapeutic; Human rights.

Technology and the Changing Face of Justice

The problem of unequal access to justice, also known as the justice gap, has been worsened by rising levels of inequality over the past half-century. The denial of due compensation and the inability to enforce rights in turn perpetuates and widens the wealth gap, initiating an ever-deepening spiral of inequality that threatens social cohesion and erodes public confidence in the courts. By empowering individuals, organizations and governments, technology and peaceable methods of dispute settlement have the potential to close each dimension of the justice gap and address the large volume of unmet justice needs that do not surface before the justice system. These unmet needs are generally straightforward but require urgent resolution, and therefore require quick and affordable solutions that focus on amicable settlement. In thinking about how we can redesign our justice system to promote solutions of this nature, we need a broader vision of justice: one that seeks to produce just outcomes through practical and proportionate means, and that aspires not merely towards keeping the peace but also building lasting peace. In this manner, our justice system will better promote effective equal access to justice, restore and strengthen communities that are riven by conflict, and help to tilt an unequal society closer towards equilibrium. Technology, Peacebuilding, Inequality, Access to justice, Proportionality, Online courts, Asynchronous hearings, Multi-door courthouse, Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), Mediation

A EFICIÊNCIA DO SISTEMA MULTIPORTAS DE JUSTIÇA E A APLICAÇÃO NOS CONFLITOS A ENVOLVENDO A FAZENDA PÚBLICA

O presente artigo propõe-se a analisar o congestionamento dos tribunais, mais especificamente no âmbito da Fazenda Pública. A inquietude da pesquisa pode ser evidenciada em face do seguinte questionamento: Como resolver a morosidade no âmbito fazendário dentro do Poder Judiciário? Assim, intenciona-se analisar como a supremacia e indisponibilidade do interesse público atreladas com a morosidade do Poder Judiciário têm dificultado a entrega da tutela jurisdicional, sendo objetivos específicos a análise da necessidade de meios adequados de resolução de conflitos e como seria a aplicação do sistema multiportas de justiça. Utiliza-se do método pesquisa bibliográfica e documental e abordagem qualitativa. Conclui-se pela necessidade de superação de dogmas e a consequente releitura da supremacia e indisponibilidade do interesse público, de forma a inaugurar nova ótica pautada na dignidade da pessoa humana, na qual os interesses públicos e privados deixam de ser contraditórios e se tornam conexos, possibilitando a aplicação do sistema multiportas de justiça nos litígios envolvendo a Fazenda Pública.

New in the Legislation on Conciliation Procedures in Russia: Judicial Conciliation and Mediation

The article is devoted to the analysis of the major changes in the Russian legislation on conciliation procedures that took place in 2019. The article focuses on a comparative analysis of the process and content of judicial conciliation and mediation, as well as the requirements for mediators in disputes settlement. Assessing the prospects for the development of the abovementioned conciliation procedures, the authors come to the conclusion about vivid advantages of judicial reconciliation, while noting that introduction of the concept of a “multi door courthouse”, if successfully implemented, can contribute to the development of other alternative ways of disputes settlement

Guest Editors’ Introduction

This paper is the guest editors' introduction of a two part Symposium Issue named Multi-Door Criminal Justice: Examining Hybrids of Non-adversarial Justice, published in 22(4) New Criminal Law Rev. (2019) and 23(1) New Criminal Law Rev. (2020). The Symposium Issue, which is based on an international conference held in May 2019 at the Bar-Ilan University Faculty of Law and the University of Haifa School of Criminology, provides a collection of articles representing a variety of perspectives on the nature of contemporary Anglo-American and European criminal law, its boundaries, and the many doors that lead to both mainstream and alternative processes and outcomes. Inspired by Harvard Law Professor Frank Sander’s vision of the multi-door courthouse in the noncriminal sphere, this guest editors' introduction coins the term “multi-door criminal justice” to reflect contemporary criminal law and criminal justice systems in post-industrial societies. This metaphor of multi-door criminal justice seeks to evoke the multiplicity of processes, mechanisms, values, and goals that coexist in modern criminal justice systems worldwide. This variety of punitive and nonpunitive criminal justice mechanisms includes, for example, arraignment hearings, problem-solving courts, restorative justice processes, diversion programs, and more, each representing a “door” in a multi-door system. Although the various doors differ in their characteristics, prevalence, and outcomes, each may be suitable in different circumstances for different cases—they are all, at the same time, part of a rich, complex system that provides social responses to crime.

싱가포르의 분쟁해결문화와 ADR제도

Singapore has witnessed rapid economic growths for a couple of decades due to the inward foreign direct investment. To accomplish this purpose, Singapore tries to transform a small island into the international business hub in East Asia. Concomitantly, Singapore government implements strategy to construct this country as the international dispute resolution hub during last couple of decades. In line with this strategy, Singapore has established Singaporian dispute resolution system, such as Singapore court annexed mediation system, Community Resolution Center, Singapore Mediation Center(SMC), Singapore International Mediation Center(SMIC), Singapore International Mediation Institute(SIMI), Singapore International Arbitration Centre(SIAC), and Singapore International Commercial Court(SICC). Furthermore, Singapore provides an unique Arb-Med-Arb service to disputants. The spectrum of dispute resolution institutions indicates that Singapore is expected to implement a vision of multi-door court house in Singapore.

Der Hochseilakt der Mediation: eine internationale Perspektive

2017 is a milestone. Forty years after the Pound Conference in the United States, at which Professor Frank Sander shared his vision of ADR and the Multi-Door Courthouse, the Global Pound Conference (GPC) in 2017 has completed its inaugural tour around the globe. In this article written in German, the author draws a balance and reflects on mediation today as well as burning questions of the future.

Space – The Final Frontier: Analysing Challenges of Dispute Resolution Relating to Outer Space

The development of outer space law at an international level has arguably stagnated after the Moon Agreement in 1979. With the rise in private space activities from the end of the twentieth century, a robust framework for dispute resolution has become an increasingly vital necessity in the space law regime. Scholars have theorized several schemes for settlement of disputes such as consultative alternative dispute resolution, a tribunal for the settlement of space law disputes, a multi-door courthouse and so on, but very few concepts have transformed into operable mechanisms. In space law at the international level, diplomatic consultation, claims commission under the Liability Convention, the International Court of Justice and, in support of arbitration, the rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration for the Settlement of Disputes relating to Outer Space 2012 remain the only existing viable mechanisms. The article evaluates all these forums for dispute settlement to demonstrate their inadequacies. Thereafter, having identified its long-term limitations, the article seeks to justify a multi-tiered arbitration clause as an effective means of settlement of disputes relating to outer space.

Multi-Door Courthouse established through the European Mediation Directive?

Summary The article deals with the systematical problem of an acceptance and impementation of foreign law instruments in EU, incoming from Anglo-American law system. Supporting partial methods of the ADR, European legislative is focusing on the mediation and using this method in civil procedure law, especially in family law matters. The practitioners have accepted the idea of mediation as a part of civil law procedure without analyzing or studying the real nature of this method or instrument. The study is looking into the problematics of the Multi-Door Courthouse model and comparing it with European situation in the member states. It is also trying to find the best possible future ways for the development in the area of mediation with the reflection of the results of the implementation of the European mediation directive.

The Role of Lawyers in Fostering Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Multi-Door Courthouse

The Role of Lawyers in Fostering Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Multi-Door Courthouse

Reviewing Specific Oversights in Civil Litigation Reforms in Malaysia

Judicial reforms in the administration of justice system generally affect the landscape of civil litigation. However, judicial reforms also draw adverse inference on the justice system if certain safeguards are lacking behind or delicate issues of public importance are not emphasized. This study aims at analysing he Malaysian Judiciary Reforms to civil litigation in Malaysia. The method of analysis is based on content analysis. This study indicates that the key catalyst to the success of civil litigation reforms of the Malaysian Judiciary (2008-2011) was contributed by excellent leadership. The study also finds that the Judicial Reforms in relation to management carry qualities that are recognized under established management practices. Nevertheless, the findings also show that there are crucial matters that are not contemplated in the said reform exercise such as the creation of a multi-door courthouse programme, methods to resolve complex civil cases and the plight of unrepresented litigants. Therefore, it is imperative for the Malaysian Judiciary to emphasize on these oversights in its future reform exercise. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n6p428

The Concept of Multi-Door Courthouse in Nigeria: Rethinking Frank Sander's Concept

Professor Frank Sander’s concept of Comprehensive Justice Centre is rooted in the idea of a courthouse which provides several labeled doors, each, representing a dispute resolution mechanism in addition to the existing window and labeled door called litigation. The rationale for this idea is that from time immemorial, ADR mechanisms had proved to be more efficient and speedy in dispensing justice among disputants. Therefore, according to Professor Frank, the idea of a Comprehensive Justice Centre will offer access to justice for the citizenry and disputes would be resolved in different ways even within the established courts. To Professor Frank, the same American Courts which then applied the same legal system, appeared to handle tax disputes reasonably well, and labor disputes were routinely resolved through arbitration without enormous difficulty or waste of time, whereas, the courts handled family disputes far less effectively. He observed that the nature of a dispute has an impact on the efficiency of the legal system applied in resolving the dispute thus, the need to have court connected dispute resolution mechanisms to bridge the existing gap. This paper therefore reviews Professor Frank Sander’s idea of Comprehensive Justice Centre, examines the existing structures of Multi-door Courthouse and, its operations in Nigeria.

English

Arbitration is considered as a cheaper, quicker and technicality-free alternative dispute resolution mechanism than litigation. This paper examines some aspects of the law and practice of commercial arbitration in Nigeria under the arbitration and conciliation act 1990. In particular, it examines the law and practice of commercial arbitration relating to arbitration agreements, appointment of arbitrators, conduct of arbitration, arbitration awards and the enforcement of awards. It also examines the multi-door courthouse concept which integrates alternative dispute resolution processes into the regular court system. It suggests that the various states in Nigeria should follow the initiative of Lagos state in providing multi-door courthouse facilities. This will enhance access to justice and minimize delays in judice delivery. Key words: Commercial arbitration, alternative dispute, law and practice.

Peace Building Mechanism: Alternative to Dispute Resolution. A Study of Calabar, Nigeria

This study focuses on peace building mechanism as an Alternative to Dispute Resolution. It sought to establish how the people of Calabar, in southern Nigeria have used it as an effective indigenous peace building mechanism to prevent, mitigate, manage, and resolve conflicts, and to draw the attention of the governments as to streamline its use as an indigenous mechanism to make the country stable and peaceful. The study was conducted in Calabar Municipal Council of Cross River State, Nigeria. The methodology used in this research was collection of information from primary sources through interviews and questionnaire administration as well as from secondary sources through library research and internet. The data used for the project were the responses of teachers, council staff and traditional rulers randomly selected from the research area. The Mean and Simple Percentage Method formulae were used to analyze the data and interpret the results. The results revealed that the people of Calabar have developed widely used and effective indigenous mechanisms for the prevention and resolution of conflicts. The study concluded that there are latent political and socio-cultural conflicts threatening the peace of Cross River State; and recommended that these indigenous preventive mechanisms should be recognized and backed by law to complement the efforts at resolving disputes in Nigeria. I. Introduction Peace has remained the most valued and indeed the greatest human need in history. Aristotle calls it the essence of human existence; and the world has never relented in the quest for peace and the termination of conflict. The 1648 treaty of peace in Westphalia which ushered in the modern nation state structure of political entities can be legitimately termed the real first attempt at securing planetary peace by mankind. The Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), the League of Nations (1918-1939) and now the United Nations (1945); are international efforts to achieve the goal of a collective security for humanity. Agwu (2007: xx) noted that the search for world peace is a persistent and interminable task; which unfortunately, has been consistently and tragically marred at the very critical junctures of their efforts. Conflict is as old as creation and it the greatest enemy of peace but a uniquely unavoidable part of man. It impinges on reality and attempts to infest all human actions. Sometimes, it is experienced within the individual or between individuals, and sometimes among groups, states and even transcends to other creatures. The fact that this phenomenon exists in all creation makes it difficult to understand. When conflict is resolved, there is bound to be peace. Conflict and peace have been subjects of investigations in political science, sociology, economics, psychology and other human sciences. The major concern has been how to give meaning to this phenomenon, diagnose its structures, locate its causes and attempt to find solutions and achieve peace. In spite of all the efforts, conflict appears to defy solutions by drawing individuals at dagger points, group as well as institutions at war and national at loggerheads. It has been of central concern not only to these categories but also to the national community and development agencies. While it has been a herculean task to terminate conflicts, the international system successfully prevented a third world war. The absence or lack of conflict management or peace building mechanisms in the early years of the Federation resulted in the 1967 Nigerian civil war. Though unable to terminate conflict, the Nigerian Federation rose to the challenge and successfully established effective peace building mechanisms that have prevented any other civil war in the country and held the federating units together for 43 years now. Despite the countrys recent relief from the Niger Delta insurgency, Nigeria is today faced with the challenge of Boko Haram. The causes of these crises in the Nigerian Federation have been fundamentally ethnic religion and politically based. Cross River State, like other states in Nigeria, has some conflict issues and the state recently joined the Federal Government of Nigeria in establishing the Multi-door Courthouse as an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism.

A Dialogue between Professors Frank Sander and Mariana Hernandez Crespo Exploring the Evolution of the Multi-Door Courthouse (Part One)

As a collaboration between UST School of Law and the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, the following is the transcript of a conversation between the creator of the multi-door courthouse, Harvard Law Professor Frank E.A. Sander, and the executive director and founder of the University of St. Thomas (UST) International ADR [Alternative Dispute Resolution] Research Network, Professor Mariana Hernandez Crespo. The UST International ADR Research Network is a research program designed to create inclusive problem-solving models that utilize social capital and consensus-building techniques (i.e., dispute-resolution processes that include the voices of all stakeholders, especially the disenfranchised members of a community). In a pilot project in Brazil, participants examined the different options available to maximize the dispute-resolution process, including the multi-door courthouse conceived by Frank Sander. The multi-door courthouse is an innovative institution that routes incoming court cases to the most appropriate methods of dispute resolution, which saves time and money for both the courts and the participants or litigants. In our Brazilian pilot project, participants met in a virtual forum following the consensus-building methodology designed by Professor Lawrence Susskind of MIT and Harvard Law School. The project was implemented under the direction of Professor Hernandez Crespo, together with a team of Brazilians, global experts and collaborators.