Litigation Arbitration Mediation

litigation arbitration mediation

For whom would Alternative Dispute Resolutio be most advantagous and least advantagous in resolving a dispute?

As opposed to litigation and legal action who would benefit from Alternative Dispute resolution methods (ie: arbitration and mediation) and who would be disadvantaged by such process and is better off to take legal action? Can you also provide some reasoning?

Hard to say depending on the specifics. If your position is that you would rather settle and avoid the hastle of a drawn out lawsuit, mediation may be the way to go. The main difference is more about principle. ie: Is it a situation where you need for whatever reason to have someone lectured by a judge and told they were wrong for something they did, than a suit and trial is the way to go. If on the other hand you cold care less about that and just want a fair and quick resolution, mediation is the way to go. If the other party is untrustworthy, unreasonable, or unfair, you are better off filing a suit and proceeding as far as necessary. If you’ve clearly done allot of wrong things that might come about in a lawsuit, mediation is a way to avoid the ugly details and just settle. If you don’t come to a reasonable agreement you can always proceed with the lawsuit after mediation.

Litigation, Mediation and Arbitration of Civil Procedure Bill 2010 (Vic) (the reforms) is Victoria in significant changes to the conduct of civil litigation in. The reforms follow a review of civil justice from the Victorian Law Reform Commission.