Title:
Do you think ADR should be the only way of solving disputes society? Agree or disagree and give reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.
Introduction
ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is one other way of solving disputes in the society. ADR is mostly private and it focuses on finding a compromise. I am therefore marrying/agreeing with the above title that, ADR should be the only way of solving disputes in the society. Reason being that we are all familiar with the most common dispute-resolution process of our civil justice system (specifically the court procedures). This way of solving disputes is more adaptable to almost every culture. Dispute comes because of unresolved conflicts, as we know that conflict is inevitable, dispute is
…show more content…
People are demanding justice and yet a majority of them have no clue of what justice really is. Some demand that the punishment should match the action which at all isn’t justice. Justice is the legal or philosophical by which fairness is administered. It will be match fair to the society to incorporate ADR than Judicial court system of solving disputes. In promoting access to justice, a modern civil justice system should offer a variety of approaches and options to dispute resolution. Citizens should be empowered to find a satisfactory solution to their problem which includes the option of a court-based litigation but as part of a wider menu of choices. When it comes to ADR most cultures adapt more rapidly because they want peace and not war. They want to set out the fire and not add fuel to the fire. ADR is more understandable and more fair to both parties as the aim is to find a compromise with an amicable solution for solving future disputes in the society. The following are the process of …show more content…
There is increasing recognition that while many disputes can be resolved, there is no single formula to decide which resolution process is suitable for or appropriate to a conflict situation. There are many variations in relation to disputes, the range of subject matters is very wide; within any category, a multitude of issues can arise; various factors can influence parties who disagree; and there are some conflicts which are not readily amenable to dispute resolution processes. Therefore, one of the more challenging aspects of alternative dispute resolution is to determine which process is most appropriate for a particular dispute.
Argument
The main reason why I strongly agree with the above title, is that ADR helps settle multi-dispute by finding a compromise and peace from both parties it is one best way of serving justice. Everyone has a right to access formal state justice. But there are many obstacles into getting formal state justice. The following are few obstacles faced by many people from getting state justice:
• Backlog in cases at the courts which lead to long delays and thus, time away from home and work;
• Lack of information or exposure to the
28.08 Continuum of Options for Dispute Resolution What happens when there is a problem? School districts should develop local problem resolution procedures. Parents should be encouraged to present concerns with a district representative. The Department should maintain a system that provides accessibility for investigations of complaints.
The conflict may also be resolved due to the interference of another
When two people are involved in a dispute the scope is way less then when two countries are disagreeing. A major necessity is that both parties have to be willing to sit down and want to talk things out. Some keys
Justice is when everyone has equal rights and is given fair treatment. Typically, this is
Despite how much you may dislike it or try to avoid it, arguing is a natural part of life. Most people would not think that arguing is a natural way of balancing things out, but it is. Although there isn’t necessarily a right way to argue, there are definitely wrong ways to argue, which will most likely lead to bigger problems than the original problem. Clearly, no one taught us how to argue, but just like we are influenced to do a lot of things in life, the way we disagree with one another and accept criticism is one. In today’s society, technology has played a major role in influencing the way we argue and disagree with one another.
#Mediating a dispute is #confidential and much more relaxed than going to #court. No #testimony is required and no #judges or #courtreporters are present. 4.
Both parties agree to be bound by the arbitrators decision. Expert determination is another alternative procedure for resolving disputes, the decision is made by an independent third party, the outcome will be based on the independent third parties decision. Negotiation should be seen as the first step in resolving disputes. It's an informal process where both parties communicate directly and aim to achieve a mutual agreement.
Justice is one of the most important moral and political concepts. The word comes from the Latin word jus, meaning right or law. According to Kelsen (2000), Justice is primarily a possible, but not a necessary, quality of a social order regulating the mutual relations of men As a result of its importance, prominent and knowledgeable people have shared their views on justice and what it means and how the state is involved in its administration. The likes of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke among others have written extensively on the concept of justice.
Lastly, courts lack the resource to implement policies in line with their decisions. Thus, even when cases are won, “court decisions are often rendered useless” as litigants are left to the task of implementation (Rosenburg 21). Despite the Constrained Courts view that courts are insufficient in producing social change, “it does not deny the possibility” (Rosenburg 21). When the right factors are in place and certain conditions in favor of the case’s outcome, courts can be a powerful institution in promoting justice (Hall 2).
This reflection paper will first address the advantages of using retributive justice approach in three court-cases. Second, it will discuss the disadvantages of using retributive justice approaches by analyzing the three court-cases listed above. Third, it will elaborate on ways that the system could have used restorative justice processes in the cases, as well as present potential outcomes that could have been reached if restoration justice was taken into consideration. First, during lecture three, we talked about the notion of just deserts.
The political decisions should be the product of fair and reasonable and debate among citizens. In a deliberation, citizens consider and argue claims and come to an agreement that will best produce the common or public good. One of the
Our Constitution permits and even directs the State to administer what may be termed 'distributive justice '. The concept of distributive justice in the sphere of law-making connotes, inter alia, the removal of economic inequalities and rectifying the injusticeresulting from dealings or transaction between unequals in society. Law should be used as an instruments of distributive justice to achieve a fair division of wealth among the members of society based upon the principle: 'From each according to his capacity, to each according to his
The various methods of ADR is further discussed below. Since the introduction of the CPR, ADR has significantly developed in England and Wales and the judiciary has also strongly encouraged the use of ADR. The judgments of the Court of Appeal in Cowl v Plymouth City Council and Dunnett v Railtrack plc both indicated that unreasonable failure to use ADR may be subject to cost sanctions. Indeed, the CPR have also introduced the possibility for cost sanctions if a party does not comply with the court‘s directions regarding ADR.
This view is far from truth in view of the developed and changed character of international law today. It is incorrect to say that international legal system is without a court to decide international disputes. The establishment of the permanent court of international justice has rightly been reckoned as a landmark for the development of international law because though in international legal system was provided with judicial organ to resolve international disputes on the basis of judicial decisions. The greatest proof of its utility and importance is the fact that its successor, the international court of justice is based on the statute of the permanent court of international justice. It is true that the decision of international court of justice is not equivalent to that the municipal courts.
Natural justice is universal and unchanging (the Form) while conventional justice is based on convention or agreement and can be changed (the matter). According to him there are two kinds of conventional justice, namely distributive and corrective justice. Distributive justice means that those who are equal should be treated equally and those who are not equal should be treated unequally. This is the kind of justice that is used when distributing wealth, honor and other assets of the community. Corrective justice, on the other hand, is the kind of justice used by courts to correct an imbalance that has occurred.