The high cost of dispute resolution has several causes, but the most important is the way of thinking established and fed by the opposing system. The essence of this system is that counterparties` lawyers have a responsibility to provide any evidence and to present any legal argument that may benefit their clients. Investigations and other judicial proceedings should not be spared in the search for relevant evidence. Through training, temperament, professional duty and often client expectations, lawyers tend to make full use of these procedures and persevere as long as all hope remains. In fact, every lawyer has a duty to be as zealous as possible, sometimes especially at the expense of truth-finding and conflict resolution to the satisfaction of both parties. Bringing litigation to court might be the best way if: Definition: Negotiation is the most fundamental way to settle disputes. It is a round-trip communication between the parties to the conflict in order to find a solution. Mediation has been used to resolve all kinds of conflicts, from international political disagreements and labour disputes to the competitions of landlords, consumers and medical abuse. In recent years, the company`s use of mediation has increased rapidly, in part in new imaginative forms. The most common way to resolve disputes is through court proceedings.
And in many cases, it`s also the best choice. However, there are alternatives that could be more appropriate depending on the needs and interests of the parties. In a more formal setting, the arbitrator will conduct a hearing at which all parties will provide evidence through documents, exhibits and testimony. The parties may agree to establish, in some cases, a separate procedure; or an administrative organization can provide procedures. There may be an arbitrator or a panel of three referees. An arbitration hearing is usually held in offices or other meeting rooms. Courts will be even more inclined to enter into an agreement in which the contract provides for a mechanism (for example. B expert disposition) or objective criteria (for example. B, fairness or adequacy) to resolve uncertainty.9 If the mechanism indicated “collapses” or if the courts conclude that the true intent of the parties, although not explicitly specified, was to resolve disputes on the basis of objective criteria. then the courts may even provide a new “machine” to resolve the disagreement.10 The rent-a-judge program is a novel variant of the arbitration process whererability by which litigants choose a retired judge to hear their case similar to an arbitrator.