ADRs are the alternative dispute resolution systems to the primarily used Adversarial System of dispute resolution.
“Brown and Marriott , authors of ADR Principles and Practice , define ADR ' as a range_of_procedures that serve as alternatives to litigation through the courts for the resolution of disputes , generally involving the intercession and assistance of a neutral and impartial third party”
Features of ADRs-
- ADR is voluntary;
- Assistance to Neutral third person;
- Faster and Economical;
- Substantial justice.
This method of dispute resolution comes with a great number of advantages or merits when compared to the adversarial system or the inquisitorial system of dispute resolution.
Following are the merits of ADRs:
- ADR is time saving system i.e. dispute can be resolved in less time when compared to the other resolution systems prevailing in the country.
- This system of dispute resolution is less formal when compared to the court-system prevailing in the nation. The mechanisms of ADR are not supposed to follow elaborate and technical procedures, which are generally followed in the adversarial system for collecting evidences and deciding the case.
- This system is more flexible as it is not bound to follow the strict rules of procedures. The procedure can be changed according to the flexibility and convenience of the parties.
- ADR is cost effective as there is no such formal requirement to hire the services of a lawyer, which generally are costly.
- The ADR resolves the conflict as well as the dispute of the parties. It focuses on the interests and needs of the parties rather than rights and liabilities.
- Parties have full control over the process. They can decide as to the procedure to be followed, time and place of the whole process.
- In ADR, there is chance of more participation of the parties. It is a party-centric mechanism where the parties are given full opportunity to participate in their case and decide the dispute accordingly. Parties are not bound by the decision imposed by a third party.
- The whole process of Alternative Dispute Resolution system is voluntary which means that the parties are not forced to enter into this process. The whole process is a consensual act and none of the parties are dragged into it, when compared to adversarial system.
- The whole process is confidential and privacy of the parties is ensured as it is conducted in a closed room only between the disputing parties and the third neutral party, if applicable.
- Personal life of the disputing parties are not disturbed as they are not bound by any procedure, rather they can make their own procedure according to their convenience.
- There is more compliance with the outcome of the process because as it is a voluntary process and parties have consented for the same, there is more chance of compliance than when decision is imposed on any party by a court.
- There is less chances of unequal footing because the parties themselves are responsible to conduct their part of case rather than hiring the Professional services of any legal representative.
- There is a situation of win-win for both the parties as they can collaborately decide the dispute and come up with creative remedies which suits the condition of both the parties.
- The parties can select judge(arbitrator) who is specialized in particular matter. This is an advantage over the adversarial system because the judges in the court are generalists and not specialists.
- The relations between the disputing parties are kept intact or maintained. There are less chances of any further dispute between the parties.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as a process where disputer are settled with the assistance of a neutral third person generally parties' own choice; where the neutral person is generally familiar with the nature of the dispute and the context in which such disputes normal arise; where the negotiations are informal, devoid of procedural technicalities and are conducted, by and large, in the manner agreed by the parties;
Where the dispute is resolved expeditiously and with less expenses; where the confidentiality is the subject - matter of the dispute maintained to a great extent; and where decision - making process aims substantial justice keeping in view the interests involved and the contextual realities.