INTRODUCTION OF TRIBUNALS AND ADR

Introduction

The fact that disagreements are unavoidable sends one clear message: settling disagreements is

required to make any advancement in any human endeavor. One of the main goals of the legal

system as it currently stands is to resolve disputes. Today, there are numerous kinds of conflicts.

There are disagreements in business, in the family, between nations and governments, in

scholarly settings, and in religious institutions (Olaoluwa, 2023). Disputes are an unavoidable

part of doing business. Conflict is unavoidable when the interests of various groups meet,

whether between buyers and sellers, producers and vendors, managers and workers, or company

and government. There is no means to keep strife at bay. In reality, conflict can increase vitality,

motivation, output, and innovation in businessmen. The challenge is to manage dispute so that it

does not stymie or, worse, destroy the ability to accomplish company objectives (Rule, 2002).

There will always be conflicts as long as man lives with man, necessitating the presence of an

expeditious method for resolving disputes. For a considerable time, the legal systems of most

established and emerging nations around the globe have focused on the Courts as the sole tool

for conflict resolution. Settlement of disputes in courts of justice has benefits, which is the reason

it has persisted for a considerable time and continues to function as a sure method to resolve

conflicts between contending parties. Nevertheless, there are several issues with the court's way

of resolving conflicts through litigation. A research by Allison (1990), on litigation as a method

for resolving disputes showed that it has some drawbacks. For example, legal expenses are as

high as they get. The cost of lawsuit lawyers in the United States exceeds $20 billion per year, a

worrisome figure that diverts our focus away from the other, frequently more significant,

business expenses of fighting our conflicts. Lawyers' expenses and other immediate costs receive

the most focus since they are the most easily quantifiable. However, the secondary business costs
of lawsuits, such as the cost of pulling key employees from fruitful duties or the cost of ruining a

lucrative partnership with a former business partner, may be just as significant. Additional while

litigation can be a useful method of resolving conflicts, it is not consistently the best option since

it is costly, has minimal chance of mending a strained relationship, is highly complicated, and

parties engaged are not constantly dragged along (Allison, 1990). When there is a disagreement

in the business world, the stakes are greater. The parties frequently have a deep desire to resolve

disputes as quickly and cheaply as feasible. This implies that parties are less likely to ride the

conventional wave of lawsuits. As a result, alternatives were explored, leading to the

advancement of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) forms as a method for resolving conflicts

(Orhero, 2020).

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

With the collaboration and agreement of the parties, the court may send the parties to ADR

centers affiliated with the judicial system. If the settlement is effective, the agreed-upon

conditions become the court's consent judgment. If the appeal is unsuccessful, the case is heard

in court. When using ADR methods, the parties can choose between informal tribunals that use

informal mediation processes without a formal framework and formal tribunals that use formal

mediation processes (McGuinness, 2016). Simply stated, ADR mechanisms include any other

form of conflict settlement that is not litigation. ADR provides a workable answer to the

problems that litigation can present in the process of resolving conflicts. Arbitration, mediation,

negotiation, conciliation, online conflict resolution, collaborative practice, and early neutral

assessment are all common types of ADR (Cornell Law School, 2023). The benefit of ADR is

that it gives each side a sense of being correct. People naturally detest being informed they are

incorrect (Carver & Vondra, 1994). “Some learned authors support this viewpoint, arguing that
while one party may be right and the other wrong in any dispute, there may also be some element

of right on each side; or one party may be morally right and another legally right; or genuine

differences in perception or concepts may allow each to be right from different vantage points”

(Olaoluwa, 2023). The use of ADR to resolve commercial disputes grew in popularity because

companies and businesspeople could no longer endure the lengthy process of resolving disputes

in court. In reality, contemporary business contracts now involve clauses mandating the parties

to first try to resolve any dispute through a type of ADR before going to court. There is no

question that ADR functions as a conflict resolution tool. As Arthur Mariott stated in The Role

of ADR in Commercial Dispute Settlement, "If ADR is to be of any value, it must work."

(Marriott, 1994).

Each technique of conflict resolution has advantages and disadvantages based on one's point of

view and circumstances. In the majority instances, parties choose litigation, arbitration,

mediation, negotiation, or any other conflict settlement mechanism that best fits their needs

(Cornell Law School, 2023). The usual conflict resolution method is court litigation. Even if it is

not explicitly stated, litigation will be the technique used if no other method is chosen. When a

defendant fails to engage or offer a case, the complainant can acquire a default judgment swiftly

and cheaply. When a case is extremely weak, the applicant may be able to receive a summary

ruling without incurring the time and expense of a complete evidentiary trial (Financier

Worldwide Magazine, 2017). Courts also have the authority to apply harsh penalties when

people (whether litigants or not) violate orders or are otherwise in defiance of court. obviously,

not all judicial systems are created equal, and in numerous other nations, courts are a far less

appealing choice. Although virtually every characteristic can be good or negative based on a

party's viewpoint, the visible nature of most judicial procedures is especially true. Publicity can
be a useful weapon for some parties in putting pressure to a rival or setting a precedent. Others

see the confidentiality afforded by arbitration procedures as a major benefit. Nevertheless, the

relative applicability of arbitration decisions around the globe makes arbitration the obvious

option for numerous international contracts. A judicial decision may be of minimal use if it can't

be executed where the defendant's assets are situated, whereas the New York Convention allows

for the execution of arbitration awards in over 150 nations globally (Steele, 2006). Other

important explanations for choosing arbitration over court litigation involve the ability to offer a

neutral and convenient platform that is effortlessly available to individuals from different

countries, as well as the ability for parties to participate in the choosing of arbitrators and help

influence the process to be subsequently followed to resolve their conflicts (Financier Worldwide

Magazine, 2017). Mediation, unlike litigation and arbitration, does not always end in a definitive

and enforceable settlement of conflicts (Staff, 2023). Mediation is basically a dialogue between

the parties assisted by a third-party mediator, with a definitive outcome achieved only if the

parties sign a contract to that end. Mediation can be extremely fluid because it works outside of

the litigation or arbitration process and is about achieving a resolution rather than establishing

the legal rights of the parties. Mediation can address issues that would be overlooked in formal

conflict settlement, such as the possibility of future commercial transactions between the parties.

Mediation can be very successful if the parties genuinely want to resolve their dispute. However,

because it does not ensure a definitive outcome, mediation should be used in conjunction with

ongoing or prospective lawsuits or arbitration (Staff, 2023).

It cannot be overstated that the distinct characteristics of each conflict settlement method allow it

to be more appropriate for certain types of disputes. Litigation is always favored in criminal

cases and as a last option for settling any disagreements. The reality that courts have coercive
powers encourages parties to use litigation to resolve conflicts (Staff, 2023). This trait, for

example, is one of the most serious flaws in ADR techniques. Furthermore, litigation is prone to

processes in order to guarantee that justice is served regardless of how long it takes. This implies

that parties who are mainly concerned with obtaining justice, regardless of how long it takes, are

more likely to engage in lawsuits. Arbitration, on the other hand, has benefits such as freedom

and control, speed, relative cheap cost, streamlined standards of evidence and disclosure, privacy

and confidentiality, and judge section. As a result, for parties who are mainly concerned with

obtaining an enforceable and timely resolution, arbitration is a probable option (Cornell Law

School, 2023). When it comes to ADR methods and litigation, it appears that there is no victor.

There is only the privilege of choosing. As a result, before starting the process of resolving

conflicts, parties must carefully consider the most advantageous method of dispute resolution. In

the case of business conflicts, it can be believed that ADR methods should be favored over

litigation as an initial course of action (Cornell Law School, 2023).

In conclusion, while the practice of ADR is gaining respect in the legal systems of different

nations, multiple difficulties have been found. These difficulties have hampered the growth of

ADR as an efficient conflict resolution tool. ADR has been criticized as a slower and more costly

option to litigation (Olaoluwa, 2023). Opponents of arbitration generally believe that it requires

too much effort to make it function and that, in the end, it is unlikely to succeed. If things don't

go as expected, the litigants will have to go back to court. The reality is more ambiguous and

rests somewhere in the middle. ADR is similar to democracy in that it is far from perfect, but it is

usually preferable to the alternatives. Litigation of conflicts is not always attractive to those who

have gone through it. Regardless of the aggravating administrative complexities and other
uncertainties, ADR is frequently the least ineffective method to ultimately resolve the

contentious conflicts that emerge when business deals fail (Olaoluwa, 2023).

References
Allison, J. R., 1990. Five Ways to Keep Disputes Out of Court-Harvard Business Review.

[Online]

Available at: https://hbr.org/1990/01/five-ways-to-keep-disputes-out-of-court%3E

[Accessed 24 March 2023].

Carver, T. & Vondra, A., 1994. Alternative dispute resolution: Why it doesn't work and why it

does. Harvard Business Review, Volume 72, pp. 120-120.

Cornell Law School, 2023. alternative dispute resolution. [Online]

Available at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/alternative_dispute_resolution

[Accessed 24 March 2023].

Financier Worldwide Magazine, 2017. When to provide for litigation, arbitration, mediation or

a combination of each. [Online]

Available at: https://www.financierworldwide.com/when-to-provide-for-litigation-arbitration-

mediation-or-a-combination-of-each#.ZB4pYXbMLIU

[Accessed 24 March 2023].

Marriott, A., 1994. The role of ADR in the settlement of commercial disputes. Asia Pacific Law

Review, 3(1), pp. 1-19.

McGuinness, H., 2016. Alternative Dispute Resolution-Mediation and Conciliation.. [Online]

Available at: https://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/reports/r98adr.pdf

[Accessed 24 March 2023].

Olaoluwa, Y., 2023. Analysis Of The Strengths And Weaknesses Of Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR) In Commercial Disputes.. [Online]

Available at:

https://www.academia.edu/44947727/ANALYSIS_OF_THE_STRENGTHS_AND_WEAKNES

SES_OF_ALTERNATIVE_DISPUTE_RESOLUTION_ADR_IN_COMMERCIAL_DISPUTES

[Accessed 24 March 2023].

Orhero, A., 2020. Conflicts And Crises In Nigeria: Management And Resolution For Peace

Building. International Journal of Legal Studies (IJOLS),, 7(1), pp. 361-374.

Rule, C., 2002. Online Dispute Resolution For Business: B2B, ECommerce. Consumer,

Employment, Insurance and other Commercial Conflicts.. s.l.: Jossey-Bass.

Staff, P., 2023. What are the Three Basic Types of Dispute Resolution? What to Know About

Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation. [Online]

Available at: https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/dispute-resolution/what-are-the-three-basic-

types-of-dispute-resolution-what-to-know-about-mediation-arbitration-and-litigation/

[Accessed 25 March 2023].

Steele, B., 2006. Enforcing international commercial mediation agreements as arbitral awards

under the New York Convention. UCLA Law Review, Volume 54, p. 1385.