Chicago Business Litigation Lawyer Blog
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes such as Arbitration an alternative to turning to courts to resolve potentially costly commercial disputes. A preference for ADR lies within attempts to focus on the solution, ADR allows us to bypass a number of costly things.
Most Litigation teams, including this firms’, has noticed that courts are struggling with budget cuts; an increase in fees and a decreased level of service. However, this has not decreased the use of litigation. Litigation is normally the last resort and costs much more than many parties anticipate.
This is one reason, for which, businesses look to arbitration, a private form of dispute resolution which can be used to resolve commercial disputes, instead. Most businesses would also agree that business is about avoiding friction, getting to the right result with less friction. That’s what ADR provides.
Astute attorneys will make the correct recommendations for their clients and will make all attempts to ensure that effective measures are in place in order to service their clients most effectively. Hence, an approach requires the balancing of a preference for alternative dispute resolution with judgment on when a dispute simply needs to be fought out in court. One truly must be skilled enough to know the implementation of the strategy and of when to fight. That is why the incorporation of arbitration agreement clauses in contracts, leans towards ensuring that a dispute resolution process is ‘in-built’ into contracts, allowing both parties to continue to do business while an issue is resolved. What’s more, is that these clauses are easy to draw for those who have working knowledge and experience. Arbitration simply isn’t used as often as it should be and sometimes attorneys are unfamiliar with the process, so it may not be considered.
Mediation is an area many are familiar with, but with arbitration, there is no need to offer a concession to those with whom the business is in dispute. A party may wish to negotiate, but can’t be compelled and a binding decision can be reached without the consent of the opponent. Other advantages it has to offer include it being private, far more flexible, with a certain outcome reached by utilizing an expert in the sector the parties operate in. The judgment is also not public, nor is the trial. Courts only become involved if the losing party fails to comply with the arbitrator’s decision. Continue reading ›