Compare and Contrast the Traditional Litigation System with the Non-Traditional Forms of ADR Introduction There are two forms of litigation used within the court system. The first is traditional litigation. It is a procedure used to decide quarrels within the civil court system. It is based on the adversarial approach also known as a face-to-face battle in which there will be one winner and one loser at the end. The other is a non-traditional procedure known as Alternative Dispute Resolutions (ADR) and it is now currently being used more frequently than the traditional method as a way to reach an agreement in a dispute.
As a result, it will be possible to sentence the offender in respect to his crime and taking into consideration his personality. In such a way, it would be possible to use sentencing more effectively since the proper use of the presentence investigation report could make it possible to find an individual approach to each offender and his/her particular case. Moreover, the knowledge of the offender’s background, inclinations, causes of crime, etc. would help judges better understand the extent to which the offender is guilty and select the punishment that could perfectly match his personality. Practically, it means that some offenders may need strict punishment while others may need les strict sentence, instead, the participation in some probation program may be even more effective to them than any term in jail, for instance.
The main reason behind this form of dispute resolution is to save on court expenses as it is considered cheaper compared to traditional litigation systems (What is the meaning of Traditional litigation system n.d). However, the traditional litigation system and the alternative dispute resolution are all forms of dispute resolution. There are four main forms of alternative dispute resolution such as; negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration. Mediation refers to a form of dispute resolution whereby a neutral person assists the parties in dispute to reach a compromise. The neutral person is referred to as the mediator and is responsible for consulting with each party to understand the common ground existing between the two parties hence acting as a facilitator.
1. What are methods of inquiry and how are they used in criminal investigation? The methods of inquiry are divided into two different categories. These categories help make many criminal cases become more organized and simpler to solve. The first method is reconstructing the past.
All criminal cases are attended by a court reporter, but a court reporter is required in civil hearings only if a party asks for one. Q: Which system is most effective? A: There is a continuing debate between those who believe that it is less costly and more efficient to have court proceedings electronically recorded and transcribed only when a transcript is absolutely necessary, and those who believe that having a stenographic reporter present to take down the testimony is most effective. A stenographic reporter may mishear, misunderstand, or err in taking down the words. However, even an attended electronic system may crash, despite backups.
There should also be an increased use of ADR in courts those tribunals for civil cases. ADR is a great way to solve civil cases not everyone has the money to go court so ADR is an option in civil cases. A problem that may affect the access of the legal system is the strict rules of evidence resulting in useful evidence being inadmissible. Evidence such as stolen evidence cannot be used in court it could be very useful in get to the bottom of a case but it inadmissible because it was stolen. There are also difficulties with witnesses giving evidence.
There can be access to justice on personal injury and business disputes. In the case of Thai Trading Co v Taylor [1998] 2 W.L.R. 893, it was held that, provided a solicitor did not charge more than his usual charge out rate in the event of success. Through this way it is easier for people to claim their losses rather than going through the process of legal aid. However this can also have its negative impacts on the community.
This tells us that civil law is for individual interest while criminal law is for public interest. It is not only the name that differs from the two categories of civil law and criminal law, the way of reaching a clear cut judgment is also relevant. In presenting evidence to indicate the defendant to be guilty has to be “clear and convincing evidence” and in criminal cases the substantial amount of evidence according to the same source has to be “Beyond a reasonable doubt” in order to prove the defendant to be guilty. Civil cases brought to court under this category are usually associated with personal disputes that can be sorted out with payments. Cases that are usually brought to court for civil law related matters are like copyright infringements, debt, evictions, partnership and inheritance disputes (under £30,00 dealt with at county court, any amount over £50,000 is sent straight to High Court) and other common complaints.
These methods can be less costly to the client. According to Cheeseman (2010), the chart below will contrast the two litigations: Nontraditional Litigation | Traditional Litigation | Mediation-simplest
Alternative Dispute Resolution Focus on Mediation Richard. K. Pope MGT 5193.E1 Negotiation Skills for Managers Amberton University Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is the process and technics for resolving disputes outside of the judicial process (formal litigation or court system). Many of the courts in the United States in order to help alleviate overcrowding and backlogs are requiring parties to use some form of ADR to try and resolve their issues before allowing their case to be heard. There are several forms of ADR, mediation, arbitration negotiation and collaborative law, most often mediation is the preferred method. Mediation is by far the most accepted method in alternative dispute resolution.