Ad hoc arbitration means settling disputes outside the traditional court system without relying on a specific institution’s rules. Instead, the parties involved agree on the arbitration process themselves.
Adjudication is like a middle step in resolving disagreements. During adjudication, a person or group called the adjudicator quickly decides a contract dispute.
An adjudicator is like a judge in formal disputes. They are responsible for listening to both sides of an argument and deciding who is right.
An adversarial process is like a legal contest where two sides, often with the help of lawyers, present their arguments to a neutral judge or decision-maker.
The advisory dispute resolution process refers to a situation where a professional, like a legal expert or mediator, looks at a dispute or problem and offers guidance.
Advisory mediation is a process where a mediator assesses and evaluates a dispute. They then offer guidance on the facts and laws involved and sometimes suggest potential solutions and how to reach them.
ADR is like finding a peaceful way to solve problems without going to court. It means using other methods to sort out issues, not legal fights.
Appraisal means determining how much something is worth or evaluating its quality.
An arbitration agreement is like a promise in writing between two sides (people or companies) to settle a problem, complaint, or argument using a fair judge called an arbitrator instead of going to a regular court.
An arbitration hearing is like a special meeting where people resolve disagreements outside court. This can happen in two ways:In-Person (Oral) Arbitration Hearing: Consider this a face-to-face or over-the-phone meeting where an arbitrator listens to people talking, looks at papers, and considers evidence to make a decision.Example: If two people have a dispute about a business deal, they can have an in-person meeting with an arbitrator who will listen to their arguments and make a fair decision.Arbitration based on Written Submissions: The arbitrator decides things by only reading documents and evidence, not talking to people directly.
An arbitration notice is like a formal letter someone writes to start an arbitration process. Imagine it as a way to ask for a fair decision when there is a dispute. It is like saying, 'Hey, we have a problem. Let us get someone neutral to help us solve it.'
An arbitrator is like a referee in a dispute. They usually have legal expertise, such as a retired judge or specialised lawyer, who listens to both sides of a disagreement and makes a fair decision, called an arbitration award. It is a bit like a sports referee making a final call in a game.
An award is a decision made by an arbitrator that settles the disputes between parties. This decision can be enforced in a public court according to local laws.
BATNA stands for Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. It is like your backup plan in negotiations. BATNA is the best thing you can do if you cannot reach an agreement with the other party. Knowing your BATNA helps you make decisions during negotiations.
Bifurcation means splitting or dividing a legal process into two or more parts. It is like breaking a complex legal case into smaller, manageable pieces. This is done to save time and money.
This type of arbitration where both parties in a dispute set limits on the possible outcomes for damage awards. It is like setting boundaries for the best and worst-case scenarios. Here is how it works:(a)The plaintiff (the person who sues) agrees to accept no less than a certain amount.(a)The defendant (the person being sued) agrees to pay no more than a certain amount.(a)If the arbitrator’s decision falls within these agreed-upon limits, that decision is final and binding. However, if the arbitrator’s decision goes beyond these limits:(i) If the decision exceeds the agreed-upon maximum (ceiling), the damages awarded are limited to that maximum.(ii) If the decision is lower than the agreed-upon minimum (floor), the damages are increased to meet the minimum.
Bona fide means acting in good faith or with sincere intentions. It is like doing something honestly and genuinely without hidden motives or deceit.
Case appraisal is a process where a person, often a specialist in dispute resolution, looks into a disagreement and offers guidance on what could be done to resolve it in a way that works for all parties involved. Sometimes, an impartial expert from outside may also give their opinion to help find a fair solution.
A caucus, or a private meeting, is like a secret talk between the mediator (the person helping to solve a problem) and just one of the groups involved in the dispute. In this meeting, they discuss ways to fix the problem without everyone else knowing. It is like huddling during a sports game to make a game plan without the other team hearing.
A claim is like making a formal request when you believe something is wrong or unfair. It is when one person (or party) says, “I think I should get something because of a problem or dispute.” This can be the first request, a response to someone else’s request, or even when different sides in a disagreement ask for something.
A claimant starts an arbitration or mediation process and makes a formal complaint or request for resolution.
Co-mediation is a collaborative approach where two or more mediators help resolve complex disputes, especially involving multiple parties. It is like having multiple experts working together to find solutions.
This is like solving problems in your neighbourhood or local area with the help of volunteers. It is used when there is no official way to solve a problem or when the official way is too expensive or hard to reach.
A complaint is when you express that you are not happy with something. People usually complain about a company’s staff, service, employees, or how they dealt with the complaint, expecting some response or fix.
Conciliation is like having a friend who helps you and someone you have a problem with to find a solution without telling you what to do. It is a way to peacefully settle disagreements, where a person called the “conciliator” helps, but their ideas are not final decisions.
A meeting or discussion where people, their representatives, or others come together to discuss disagreements. These discussions can have different purposes and involve various ways of helping resolve the issues.
A confidential listener is a neutral third party who helps settle disputes between two parties, such as in a legal or negotiation context. It is a method often used to facilitate fair and confidential negotiations. Here is how it works: (a)Submission of Positions: The involved parties share their confidential settlement offers or positions with the confidential listener. (b)No Sharing of Offers: Importantly, the confidential listener does not disclose one party’s offer to the other party. They keep this information private. (c)Determining Negotiability: The confidential listener evaluates whether the positions from both parties are within a negotiable range. In other words, are the offers close enough to reach a compromise? (d)Settlement Options: Depending on the evaluation: (i)Suppose both parties have offers that overlap, and the plaintiff’s offer is lower. In that case, they may agree to settle at a middle point between their offers. (ii)Suppose the offers are within a specified range (e.g., 10 per cent). In that case, the confidential listener can inform and guide the parties to negotiate and narrow the gap. (iii)If the offers are far apart and not within the specified range, the process can be repeated, or alternative negotiation strategies can be explored. This process helps parties reach settlements while maintaining the confidentiality of their offers.
Conflict coaching is a process that involves teaching individuals how to handle and resolve conflicts effectively. It typically occurs in one-on-one sessions, where a neutral third party (the conflict coach) helps someone navigate a conflict they are experiencing with another person. The goal is to empower the individual to manage the conflict constructively.
Consolidation simplifies the process by combining multiple ongoing arbitration cases into one. However, it only happens when the cases and parties are pretty similar. It is like combining all your puzzle pieces to solve one big puzzle instead of many small ones.
A person who buys or uses products or services for their needs, family, or home.
This method is used in conflict resolution and decision-making, especially when many people or groups are involved. It is like bringing everyone to discuss and agree on something important.
Convening is when a neutral person brings together people who disagree to determine if they can talk it out. This person helps them understand how to solve the problem and sets some basic rules for their discussion.
People work together to solve a problem or disagreement without involving a third party. It happens when the involved parties agree to solve a common issue. Instead of competing, they choose to collaborate.
A deposition is like a formal statement given by a person, often a witness, who promises to tell the truth. This statement is usually written down or recorded and can be used later in legal situations.
Desk arbitration, also known as arbitration on the papers, is a process where both parties in a dispute submit their arguments and evidence in written form. Instead of a traditional in-person hearing, a decision is reached by the arbitrator solely based on these written submissions.
Disclosures mean the information that a person must share to be transparent about any connections or experiences that could make them seem unfair.
Discovery in legal terms means sharing important information or documents with the other party during a legal case. It is like showing your cards in a card game so both sides can prepare and strengthen their case.
A discovery referee is like a mediator in legal cases, especially when things get complicated.
Dispute panels are like friendly referees. They are neutral people who help when there is a fight or confusion.
This means finding ways to solve disagreements. It includes methods to prevent arguments or help people settle their disagreements with or without going to court. Dispute resolution can involve discussing things, getting advice, or even having someone decide for you.
A Dispute Review Board, or DRB, is like a group of experienced problem solvers hired to resolve arguments that can come up during construction projects. This group typically has one or three experts in settling disagreements, and they are chosen by contract. They listen to the concerns of the owner, contractor, or anyone else involved in the project and help find fair solutions.
A document is any piece of writing or data that contains essential information, like facts, opinions, statements, or descriptions. It can take various forms, such as agreements, records, letters, emails, etc. Documents are essentially records of information that can be in written or digital form, and they serve as evidence or records of various activities and transactions.
Early neutral evaluation is a private and early step in the legal process before a formal trial, saving time and resources. In this process, both parties choose a neutral expert with relevant experience. This expert listens to each side’s arguments and evidence and then assesses the case’s strengths and weaknesses. The goal is to help the parties find common ground and resolve their dispute without going through a full trial.
Emergency Arbitration is like a fast-track solution in legal disputes. Imagine two parties in a business disagreement wanting quick action before a complete legal process. Emergency arbitration steps in. It lets them ask for temporary solutions before a proper legal case. This can be super useful when waiting for a full trial would cause harm or damage.
Evaluative mediation is an approach where the mediator relies on their experience and expertise in a particular field to predict potential outcomes of a dispute.
Facilitative mediation is a way to solve problems where the people involved have the most control. A mediator helps them talk better and find solutions by sharing all the essential information and understanding each other’s needs and concerns.
This is like being a detective in a mystery story. Discovering important information or facts can help resolve a disagreement or problem.
Fast-track arbitration, also known as expedited arbitration, refers to a dispute resolution process where disagreements are resolved quickly, following specific time constraints agreed upon by the involved parties. This approach is designed to speed up the arbitration process, reducing the time it takes from the start of the proceedings to the final decision.
A focus group is a less formal meeting where lawyers share parts of their case with jurors. It is like a brainstorming session where jurors give feedback to trial lawyers about evidence or arguments in real-time.
Final Offer Arbitration, also known as Baseball Arbitration, is a unique way of settling disputes. This method got its name from its historical use in resolving disputes between baseball players and teams. It is like a game where the arbitrator decides which side’s offer gets the final “score.” Here is how it works: (a)Both parties, the one making a claim (plaintiff) and the one defending against it (defendant), independently propose their “final offers” to an arbitrator. (b)The arbitrator must choose the plaintiff’s or the defendant’s offer without any modifications. (c)The decision is based on the arguments presented by both sides.
Hybrid processes in dispute resolution combine different methods to customize solutions for specific conflicts. This flexible approach adapts to all parties’ unique needs and interests.
In this type of arbitration, when parties cannot agree, they set a penalty for anyone who rejects the arbitrator’s decision, goes to court, and does not do better by a specific percentage or formula. Penalties can involve paying the legal fees of the other party.
When two parties disagree, they can choose someone else, like a lawyer or agent, to help them sort things out instead of talking directly. These representatives act on behalf of the main parties and might have the power to make agreements. Sometimes, a mediator can assist in the process, but they do not decide right or wrong – they help everyone talk it out.
In an inquisitorial process, the person in charge can conduct their research, seek expert advice, invite witnesses, and actively ask questions to those witnesses. This approach is like a detective’s method of investigation. Instead of just listening to what others say, the decision-maker actively investigates and gathers information to make a fair decision.
Interest-based problem-solving is finding solutions that work well while strengthening relationships between the involved parties. It involves: Separating People from Problems: Focusing on the issue, not blaming or attacking individuals involved. Exploring All Interests: Understanding the underlying concerns and needs of everyone involved to clarify the problem. Brainstorming Solutions: Generating various ideas and possibilities to address the problem. Using Mutual Standards: Agreeing on a fair and reasonable basis for reaching a solution.
An interim order is like a temporary decision made by someone in authority, which does not last forever. It is like getting a Band-Aid before seeing the doctor for a more permanent fix.
An interrogatory is like a formal written question asked to a witness during a legal process, and the witness has to answer it while promising to tell the truth.
In this process, a dispute resolution expert, the investigator, looks into a disagreement and offers guidance regarding the facts involved. However, they do not decide on the dispute’s outcome.
Lex arbitri is a legal term that means the laws of where an arbitration occurs. It is like the rulebook that guides how the arbitration process works.
Med-Arb is like having two steps to resolve a dispute: (a)Mediation is like talking it out with a neutral person to find a solution. It is like having a friend help you both agree on something. (b)Arbitration happens if talking does not work, and you go to this step. It is like asking a judge to decide; whatever they say is final.
Mediation is like a friendly conversation to resolve a disagreement, but it is not like a judge’s decision that you must follow. It is a way for people to talk and find solutions together.
A mediator is like a peacemaker. They are a person, often someone experienced in law like a retired judge or specialised lawyer, who helps settle disputes between two or more parties. Think of them as a referee in a game. They do not pick sides; instead, they listen to everyone’s concerns and guide them toward finding a solution that everyone can agree on.
A mediation agreement is a formal promise between people in a disagreement. This agreement says that they will try to solve their problem by talking with the help of a mediator. However, whatever the mediator suggests, they do not have to do it if they do not want to.
A mediation conference is like a meeting where people try to resolve a problem without going to court. Here is how it works:Talk about the problem: Each side can explain their story to a mediator. This person is like a referee, not a judge. Private chats: The mediator talks to each side separately to understand their issues better. Settlement talk: The mediator then helps both sides find a fair solution. They suggest possible solutions to end the argument. Meeting or phone: This talk can happen in person or on the phone, depending on what works best for everyone.
A mediation notice is a written document that the person making a claim (the claimant) sends to the other party involved (the respondent) to start resolving their dispute through mediation. It has also sometimes been called a request for mediation.
A mini-trial is a formal mediation process where both parties involved in a dispute relinquish some control over procedures. They aim to shift the conflict from a legal context to a business problem. It involves non-legal representatives and a neutral mediator working together to find a resolution.
A multi-tiered dispute resolution clause (MDR clause) is like a step-by-step problem-solving plan. Imagine it as a ladder with different levels: (a) Notification: When there is a problem, the first step is to let the other party know about it, like sending them a message or email. (b) Consensual Resolution: If the problem is not fixed by talking about it, the next step is working together to find a solution. This might involve meetings or negotiations.(c) Arbitration or Litigation: If the first two steps do not work, it is like going to a higher authority for help. This can be arbitration (where an impartial person decides the solution) or litigation (going to court).
Narrative mediation is like a storytelling approach to resolving conflicts. In this process, people in conflict share their stories, and a mediator helps find common ground between them. This can create new trust-building stories that encourage cooperation. This approach promotes trust and cooperation.
A neutral is like a referee in a sports match. They are individuals who help in resolving disputes or conflicts using methods like mediation or arbitration. They are like peacemakers who do not take sides but guide others to find fair solutions.
In this process, both sides in a dispute explain their case to a neutral expert, an evaluator. This evaluator, who typically has expertise in the subject matter or legal matters relevant to the dispute, assesses the strengths and weaknesses of each party’s evidence and arguments. After this evaluation, the evaluator offers their non-binding opinion and suggests potential ways to resolve the conflict. While the evaluator’s opinion is not legally binding, it is a valuable tool to help the parties negotiate and find a resolution.
Neutral expert fact-finding means when both sides in a dispute hire an impartial expert to give their professional opinion on complex technical, scientific, or legal issues. Depending on the agreement, this opinion can be either the final say or just advisory.
Non-binding arbitration is a process similar to binding arbitration but with a critical difference. In non-binding arbitration, the decision made by the neutral third party is not final or mandatory. Instead, it serves as guidance or advice. Parties involved in a dispute can use this advisory decision to help them settle the dispute through negotiation or other methods. However, they are not legally bound to follow it.
ODR stands for Online Dispute Resolution. It is like solving disagreements or conflicts using the internet. ODR uses digital tools and platforms to settle disputes or negotiate agreements without needing to meet in person.
An ombudsperson is like a friendly problem-solver. They use various methods, such as talking, mediating, and investigating, to help people settle disagreements. When someone has a complaint, the ombudsperson talks to everyone involved, looks at the facts, and suggests solutions. They do not force decisions on anyone; they are good at convincing people to agree on solutions. If someone does not like the ombudsperson’s idea, they can still seek help from other places. Ombudspersons can deal with issues at work, like employee arguments, or issues outside of work, like customer complaints. They are also good at finding patterns in problems and suggesting ways to fix them.
An order is like a decision or rule made by an arbitrator to set clear rules and responsibilities for everyone involved.
A panellist is part of a group responsible for resolving disputes in arbitration. In arbitration, disputes can be settled by a single unbiased arbitrator or a team of three arbitrators, known as a tribunal. When an arbitration clause specifies a panel, each party chooses one arbitrator for the panel. These appointed arbitrators can act as neutral decision-makers or advocates for their respective parties. To prevent conflicts and ensure fairness, the two arbitrators selected by the parties will then choose an additional arbitrator to serve as the tribunal’s chairman, helping to avoid situations where no decision can be reached. This process ensures a balanced and impartial resolution of disputes.
Anyone involved in a legal claim, whether making a claim (claimant) or defending against one (respondent).
A plenary session is when everyone involved in a meeting or discussion comes together to share their thoughts to find a solution. It usually starts with each person or group listening to what others say.
This part of your agreement discusses how you will solve problems if they arise. It can say you will use different ways to work things out, like talking with a middle person called an arbitrator or mediator.
A private trial is like a regular court trial held by a retired judge. Like a regular trial, the decision can be challenged if there are legal mistakes or the evidence does not support it.
A reasoned decision is like a thoughtful verdict. It is not just the final decision but also includes a written explanation of the facts and the legal reasons behind that decision. It is like when a judge not only says 'guilty' or 'not guilty' but also explains why.
This is when someone is appointed to take care of and manage assets or property that belongs to others. This can happen for various reasons, like when there is a legal dispute when a business is closing down, or when assets need to be sold.
Reconciliation is a process where people who disagree try to resolve their issues and make amends to rebuild their relationship. This is especially useful when the people involved will continue interacting with each other, like in family arguments or workplace conflicts. A mediator or counsellor might help in this process.
A reply is a formal written response from the person or party who receives an arbitration notice (the respondent). This response is provided after the claimant initiates arbitration proceedings by filing a notice of their claim. Reply is crucial in arbitration because it allows both parties to present their cases and helps the arbitrator or arbitration panel understand the full scope of the dispute before making a decision.
A representative is someone who speaks or acts on behalf of another person or a group. In arbitration or mediation, a representative is a person, lawyer, or any individual who stands for and supports one of the parties involved.
A respondent has a claim made against them in a legal or formal context. They are the person or party that needs to answer to the claims made by another.
Sanctions in the context of legal proceedings refer to penalties or punishments imposed by an arbitrator in response to specific actions or behaviours during the arbitration process. These penalties can include:(a) Dismissal of the Claim or Counter-Claim: A party’s legal case may be rejected or thrown out by the arbitrator. (b) Preclusion of Evidence: It involves preventing specific evidence from being used in the case. This could weaken a party’s position. (c) Admission of Facts: The arbitrator might compel a party to accept specific facts as accurate, which can work against their interests. (d) Payment of Fees, Costs, or Attorney’s Fees: A party may be required to cover the costs of the arbitration process, including the fees of their legal representation. (e) Granting of an Award: This is the decision or judgement made by the arbitrator regarding the dispute. It may involve compensation or other remedies. (f) Imposing Sanctions Against a Party or Representative: These penalties can apply to either the party involved in the dispute or their legal representatives.
A settlement conference is like a meeting to solve a problem without going to court. It is often used for simple cases. In this meeting, people from both sides of the problem talk with a neutral person, usually a retired judge. This person helps them find a solution without going through a full court trial.
Shuttle mediation is like a mediator-guided conversation where people stay in separate rooms. The mediator goes back and forth between them, helping share information and offers. It is helpful when direct communication is challenging.
A signature is like your stamp on a document, showing that you approve or agree with it. It is typically your name written specially.
A special master is appointed by a judge to help manage and make decisions about specific parts of a legal case. They are like assistants to the judge and can be chosen before, during, or after a trial. The main goal of a special master is to save time and money in legal proceedings. Special Masters often act a bit like judges, especially in complex cases. They can work on a case for months or even years. They provide recommendations to the judge, who can turn them into official court orders if they agree. This helps the court run more smoothly and efficiently. Here are some everyday tasks they handle: (a)Overseeing Discovery Disputes: They make sure both sides in a case share information fairly. (b)Property Distribution: They help decide how property should be divided among parties in a legal dispute. (c)Accounting: Special Masters manage financial matters related to the case. (d)Administering Settlements: If an agreement is reached to end the case, they ensure everyone follows the terms. (e)Monitoring Decrees: They ensure that court orders are followed.
Tradition-based mediation resolves disputes within a community, industry, or group that prioritises maintaining peace and harmony over strict legal justice. It is less concerned with keeping things secret, as the group is interested in the outcome. These mediators are often chosen for their wisdom and social standing, not just their expertise. They encourage open conversations, often involving rituals, to mend relationships, reconcile differences, and honour the community’s values.
Transformative mediation is a way to help people in a conflict understand each other’s needs and feel empowered. This process aims to transform how they communicate and, hopefully, resolve their dispute more effectively.
A two-track approach is a strategy that combines traditional legal proceedings (like going to court) with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods, such as negotiation or mediation. In this approach, people not directly involved in the court case handle the negotiation or ADR part. This can happen at the same time as the court case or during a break from it. It is useful when giving up on the court case is not an option, when the threat of court helps encourage the other party to consider a different solution, or when the court case has turned bitter and suggests a settlement might not be a good idea.
WATNA means Worst Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. It is like your worst-case scenario in negotiations. It is what you will end up with if you cannot agree with the other party. Understanding your WATNA helps you evaluate the risks of not reaching a deal.
A person, whether directly or indirectly involved in the situation, who comes to an arbitration hearing and shares their honest account of what they know about the dispute, claim, or problem. This helps the arbitrators better understand the situation.
Written Submissions refer to any documents or materials presented by a person involved in a legal case to support their arguments. When someone wants to prove their point or case, they can provide various written documents in legal matters. These can include legal memos (explanation letters), papers explaining their stance, copies of previous legal decisions, written records of what witnesses said, reports from experts, pictures, bills, receipts, invoices, or any other paper-based proof.
ZOPA stands for Zone of Possible Agreement. It is like the range where a deal can happen in negotiations. ZOPA is the area between what you want and what the other party is willing to give. If your expectations overlap with theirs, you have a ZOPA and can likely make a deal. However, if there is no overlap, reaching an agreement becomes challenging.
