Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes such as Arbitration an alternative to turning to courts to resolve potentially costly commercial disputes. A preference for ADR lies within attempts to focus on the solution, ADR allows us to bypass a number of costly things.
Most Litigation teams, including this firms’, has noticed that courts are struggling with budget cuts; an increase in fees and a decreased level of service. However, this has not decreased the use of litigation. Litigation is normally the last resort and costs much more than many parties anticipate.
This is one reason, for which, businesses look to arbitration, a private form of dispute resolution which can be used to resolve commercial disputes, instead. Most businesses would also agree that business is about avoiding friction, getting to the right result with less friction. That’s what ADR provides.
Astute attorneys will make the correct recommendations for their clients and will make all attempts to ensure that effective measures are in place in order to service their clients most effectively. Hence, an approach requires the balancing of a preference for alternative dispute resolution with judgment on when a dispute simply needs to be fought out in court. One truly must be skilled enough to know the implementation of the strategy and of when to fight. That is why the incorporation of arbitration agreement clauses in contracts, leans towards ensuring that a dispute resolution process is ‘in-built’ into contracts, allowing both parties to continue to do business while an issue is resolved. What’s more, is that these clauses are easy to draw for those who have working knowledge and experience. Arbitration simply isn’t used as often as it should be and sometimes attorneys are unfamiliar with the process, so it may not be considered.
Mediation is an area many are familiar with, but with arbitration, there is no need to offer a concession to those with whom the business is in dispute. A party may wish to negotiate, but can’t be compelled and a binding decision can be reached without the consent of the opponent. Other advantages it has to offer include it being private, far more flexible, with a certain outcome reached by utilizing an expert in the sector the parties operate in. The judgment is also not public, nor is the trial. Courts only become involved if the losing party fails to comply with the arbitrator’s decision.
On a larger business scale, arbitration is particularly popular in those agreements with an international dimension. A trend is likely to be seen for smaller businesses and domestic disputes, as it gives businesses every incentive to get right to the heart of the problem encouraging continual relations.
For instance, a clause could stipulate that if a customer has a problem, they can inform the company, which will attempt to resolve the issue within 30 days of receiving notice. A customer who is unhappy with a settlement offer may then start an arbitration proceeding. If the business is deemed to have offered an inadequate settlement, the customer gets the arbitrator’s award or $10,000—whichever is greater. The business pays any expert witness fees and costs and pays double the amount of attorney fees. Overall, an arbitration system is extremely customer-friendly due to customers freely entering into contracts and not being forced to agree to arbitration.
It can be seen that dispute resolution provisions matter, and really matter when a claim has been made or a lawsuit filed. Having ADR provisions may prove to be the difference between winning or losing a claim or dispute. Thus, dispute resolution clauses deserve attention when a contract is being drafted. Advocates in favor of arbitration say it is better, cheaper and faster than the court system. Discovery in arbitration is generally more streamlined, and discovery in court is a prime factor as to why the litigation costs be higher. For reasons abovementioned, we recommend getting a consultation from a litigator prior to the formation of contracts and during the dispute resolution process. The bottom line regarding the dispute resolution clause is working knowledge of meaning and of how it works before signing. Please feel free to discuss any of these issues with one of our attorneys so that we may service you better.
http://www.corpcounsel.com/id=1202795458469/ATT-GC-Says-Choosing-ADR-Over-Court-Has-Become-Overriding-PhilosophySuper Lawyers named Illinois commercial law trial attorneys Peter Lubin and Vincent DiTommaso Super Lawyers and Illinois business dispute attorneys Patrick Austermuehle and Andrew Murphy Rising Stars in the Categories of Class Action, Business Litigation, and Consumer Rights Litigation. DiTommaso Lubin Austermuehle’s Illinois business trial lawyers have over thirty years of experience in litigating complex class action, copyright, non-compete agreement, trademark and libel suits, consumer rights and many different types of business and commercial litigation disputes. Our Skokie and Evanston business dispute lawyers, civil litigation lawyers and copyright attorneys handle emergency business law suits involving copyrights, trademarks, injunctions, and TROS, covenant not to compete, franchise, distributor and dealer wrongful termination and trade secret lawsuits and many different kinds of business disputes involving shareholders, partnerships, closely held businesses and employee breaches of fiduciary duty. We also assist businesses and business owners who are victims of fraud. You can contact us by calling (630) 333-0000 or our toll-free number (877) 990-4990. You can also contact us online here.