scholarly journals The Alternate Dispute Resolution Movement: Wave of the Future of Flash in the Pan

1969 ◽  
pp. 233
Author(s):  
Howard R. Sacks
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Future ◽  
Alternate Dispute Resolution

The author discusses the Alternate Dispute Resolution movement and the alternate methods it advocates.

scholarly journals Contextualizing alternate dispute resolution: an agile approach to resolve disputes in infrastructure projects

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-116
Author(s):  
Shahin Kabir ◽  
Ammar Younas ◽  
Manish Paul
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Diagnostic Approach ◽  
Infrastructure Projects ◽  
Agile Approach ◽  
Alternate Dispute Resolution

This paper examines the potential disputes in infrastructure projects’ environment, critiques the available Alternate Dispute Resolution options in practice both in local and international jurisdictions and proposes a diagnostic approach to resolve the disputes prevalent in infrastructure projects

Deal Mediation: The Future of Alternative Dispute Resolution

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-150
Author(s):  
Claude Amar
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Future ◽  
Deal Making

Während Mediation als eine exzellente Methode zur Beilegung bereits bestehender Streitigkeiten hinreichend bekannt ist, kann sie sich gerade als Mittel der Konfliktvermeidung als zumindest genauso nützlich erweisen. Obwohl Mediation in dieser Weise noch nicht breitenwirksam eingesetzt wird, sprechen starke Argumente dafür, Mediation nicht nur als Alternative zu etablierten Streitbeilegungsmethoden einzusetzen, sondern sie gezielt als frühes und vorbeugendes Mittel im Bereich des Deal Making zu nutzen. Dieser Beitrag zielt darauf ab, die Vorteile von Mediation in nicht-konventionellen Bereichen und gerade im Zusammenhang mit Deal Making und Deal Management hervorzueheben, und damit ihre weiterreichende Nutzung und Weiterentwicklung zu fördern.

Professional Conduct

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann A. Abbott
Keyword(s):  
Social Workers ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Professional Behavior ◽  
Professional Conduct ◽  
Professional Misconduct ◽  
Alternate Dispute Resolution ◽  
Professional Review ◽  
Over Time

The professional review process delineates procedures for hearing complaints of alleged professional misconduct by members of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). It provides mechanisms for conducting hearings and alternate dispute resolution via mediation, monitoring professional behavior, and sanctioning and developing corrective actions for NASW members who are in violation of the NASW’s Code of Ethics. The process, originally developed in 1967, has been modified over time to reflect the best identified means for conducting fair hearings and carrying out the most appropriate interventions.

Integrated Justice in Pakistan: From Legal Pluralism to Normative Convergence

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 805-820
Author(s):  
Tahir Mahmood ◽  
Sajjad Ali Khan ◽  
Shahab Sarwar
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Pluralism ◽  
Court System ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Legal Legitimacy ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
Alternate Dispute Resolution ◽  
Parting Ways

Legal pluralism, throughout most of developing countries, has been extant since the onset of colonial era. Manifested in a variety of forms, legal pluralism is inherently characterized by both promises as well as limitations. In Pakistan, legal pluralism is epitomized by the prevalence and functioning of parallel systems of justice such as formal courts and Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism (ADRM), such as “Jirga. Poor coordination and tenuous enforcement mechanisms, however, render the formal justice system in Pakistan one of poorest performers in terms of judicial efficacy world-wide. This article seeks to explore the possibility of a convergence between traditional and modern models of dispute resolution, i.e. Jirga and court system and the resultant efficacy thereof through devising a conceptual framework. The framework reveals that both formal courts and Jirga demonstrate marked discrepancies concerning their efficacy with respect to the provision of justice and dispute resolution. Findings from the field, however, evince that Jirga stand out to be a relatively more effective mechanism of dispute resolution than formal courts. The conceptual framework, however, implies that by converging both systems it is possible to cope with the limitations of each of the two systems such that while courts could provide legal legitimacy to the Jirga by improving its decency and accountability through regulations, Jirga could enhance the legitimacy of courts by improving its accessibility and transparency through feedback mechanisms. The article concludes by way of arguing that instead of parting ways with each other, both courts and jirga shall seek to go hand in hand in order avoid delays in the  provision of justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document