header-logo header-logo

06 December 2013 / Justin Michaelson
Issue: 7587 / Categories: Features , ADR
printer mail-detail

A–Z of ADR: the sequel

web_michaelson

Justin Michaelson updates the need-to-know guide to ADR…a decade on

A
ADR

In legal parlance, the concept of “ADR” has changed over the past 10 years. Post-Woolf, “ADR” or alternative dispute resolution was shorthand for everything but litigation. Even arbitration was seen as one “alternative”. It was the buzzword for how best to clear up the court lists and encourage litigants to look elsewhere to resolve disputes. There was no specific distinction between non-binding and binding adjudicative and non-adjudicative processes. Times have changed. “ADR” as a concept encompasses non-binding and non-adjudicative methods of dispute resolution, the most common being mediation. It most definitely does not now include arbitration. “ADR” is now an aspiration, a drive away from dispute, providing the antidote to the world of litigation lawyers. The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) and the International Institute for Conflict Preventation and Resolution (CPR) launched recently a “Corporate ADR Pledge” comprising a commitment to apply resources to managing and resolving disputes through negotiation, mediation and other ADR processes, with a view to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll