Dispute Resolution Paper #3

Arbitration

The Case

Arbitration as Dispute Resolution

The Firefighters' Union and the City of Richmond were having a dispute over whether the firefighters were entitled to additional compensation for extra hazardous service. The union claimed the firefighters' contract provided for such compensation. The city claimed the contract did not provide for such compensation. The parties agreed to hire the American Arbitration Association (AAA), a private arbitration service. The AAA provided the parties with a list of potential arbitrators. The parties reviewed the list and selected one arbitrator. The AAA then outlined the arbitration process for the parties. The arbitrator conducted a hearing where both parties made opening and closing statements and presented evidence. At the conclusion of the hearing, the arbitrator issued her decision, thus resolving the issue for the parties.

Regardless of who fashions the rules for the arbitration, the arbitrator resolves the dispute for the parties. The arbitrator resolves both issues of fact and issues of law. In arbitration, there is no jury to resolve issues of fact. In arbitration, the arbitrator's decision is generally final and can be appealed to the courts only on very limited grounds.

1. Why would the Firefighters' Union and the city select arbitration as their method of dispute resolution?
2. Why would the union and the city agree to have an organization such as the American Arbitration Association provide the process and the arbitrator?
3. Should either the union or the city have refused to arbitrate?
4. Should either have selected inaction, acquiescence, negotiation, or mediation?

Page length: 3 pages or one thousand words

SAMPLE PAPER

Dispute Resolution Paper #3: Arbitration

TIP:You can cite this paper as a source in your paper

Arbitration as Dispute Resolution

When both parties reach an agreement, a dispute is submitted to an arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators, and they deliver a legally binding decision through a process referred to as arbitration. Instead of resorting to court proceedings, both sides opt for arbitration as a private method for resolving conflicts (Ihya et al., 2023). Arbitration can only proceed with the mutual consent of both parties, and they typically include an arbitration provision in the relevant contract to address any additional disputes that may arise. A submission agreement, signed by the involved parties, can be employed to refer an ongoing dispute to arbitration. In contrast to mediation, arbitration does not permit either party to withdraw unilaterally. Parties can select neutral arbitrators from a suitable jurisdiction and determine crucial elements, such as the language used in arbitration, the venue, and the applicable laws. This approach ensures neither party has an advantage akin to a home-court setting.

Alice Refusing to Arbitrate

Generally, Alice would be bound by the arbitration provision in the sales contract. Courts typically enforce arbitration agreements. Unless there are legal grounds to challenge the validity or enforceability of the arbitration clause, Alice would likely be required to pursue arbitration.Whenever the other party fails to engage in arbitration as stipulated by the arrangement or in any other manner violates the agreement to arbitrate, then one of the parties may take the other party to the courts to enforce the clause.Arbitrators must conduct themselves between the parties in a fair and unbiased manner (section 33(1), Arbitration Act). Section 1(a) also specifies that "the purpose of arbitration is to achieve the fair settlement of disputes through an impartial tribunal avoiding unnecessary postponement or expense" (Sharma, 2020).

Selecting Another Method of Dispute Resolution

In most cases, the presence of a specific arbitration clause would limit Alice's options for dispute resolution. The agreement between state governments and investors to which issues will be arbitrated is based on an arbitration clause. The arbitration tribunal's jurisdiction arises from this consent (Radovi, 2021). Arbitration clauses are contractual agreements, and parties are expected to adhere to the agreed-upon method. Arbitration results are harsher and more definitive than court action since there is less opportunity for discovery, and there are fewer appeal rights. It is not easy to understand why arbitration seems more equitable than going to court. Litigation, but not in court, constitutes what arbitration is. In some situations, arbitration could be the best option. However, if both parties mutually agree to an alternative method, they could potentially deviate from arbitration.

Another Method of Dispute Resolution Better for Alice

Selecting another better method to solve the dispute in question depends on the circumstances. If Alice believed that another method, such as mediation or litigation, would better serve her interests, she could attempt to negotiate a change with Aqua Marine. The two sides negotiate face-to-face through potentially arbitrary lengths of cheap talk (Ihyaet al., 2023). A third-party observer who provides a piece of non-binding advice speaks with the parties during mediation. Both parties agree to follow the third party's advice under arbitration. The suitability of a method depends on factors like cost, time, and the complexity of the case.

Litigation might be considered better if Alice prefers a more formal process with a judicial resolution.The process of getting ready to present a case before the court characterizes litigation which includes, for example, ordinary lawsuits (Laneet al., 2021). Being in litigation requires oneto Bring legal action against a different individual or group, together withlegal assistance or agents, to prepare a case. In court, provide hercase's specifics, supporting documentation, compelling witnesses, and more.Await the judge's or jury's decision, which will rely on the particulars of hercase and the standard of evidence.

Another Method of Dispute Resolution Better for Aqua Marine

Aqua Marine might prefer arbitration due to its potential benefits, such as reduced costs and quicker resolution.For millennia, arbitration has been made an element of the dispute settlement process. It offers a chance for a sensible, economical, and timely decision based on the merits. Most businesses believe that arbitration is the best way to settle commercial issues (Ihyaet al., 2023). The many advantages of arbitration over court litigation include party ownership of the process, often lower costs and faster settlement timeframes, secrecy, flexibility, and ease of use. In addition, it creates prizes and selects decision-makers based on desirable attributes and backgrounds, as well as broad user satisfaction.

If Aqua Marine believes it has a strong case, the streamlined nature of arbitration might be advantageous.According to legal definitions, arbitration is an alternate form of conflict settlement where parties select an impartial judge who is going to hear the case, consider the evidence, and issue a decision. The arbitrator may grant damages if necessary. However, if Aqua Marine wanted a more public forum or anticipated a need for extensive legal discovery, litigation might be a better method.Litigation provides a definitive conclusion to the process, in contrast to discussions or mediation (Laneet al., 2021). However, the judge will decide on the case. Though it may take some time, one may be certain both parties will finally be able to overcome this problem.

The effectiveness of different dispute resolution methods varies based on the specific circumstances of each case. A range of useful recommendations are available to assist in choosing a dispute resolution procedure. These consist of the parties' objectives, timing, the dispute's legal status, influence over the outcome, formalities and expenses, interpersonal connections, and personalities. The parties may also consider negotiation and mediation as alternative methods before resorting to more formal processes (Goldberget al., 2020).Typically, the first course of action to pursue before utilizing further ADR techniques is negotiation. It allows for greater flexibility for both parties and is, therefore, more casual. In essence, negotiation consists of the parties recognizing a problem and getting together to resolve it; they are in charge of the procedure and the outcome.

Conclusion

In conclusion, arbitration provides parties with a discreet and effective way to settle disagreements, making it a respectable substitute for conventional court proceedings. The way that Alice and Aqua Marine handle disagreements is determined by the arbitration provision that is present in their sales agreement. Unless there are legitimate reasons to contest the arbitration clause's legitimacy, Alice would normally be obligated to abide by it. Their enforceability highlights the necessity of carefully weighing arbitration clauses before entering into contracts.The advantages of arbitration are its flexibility, lower costs, and efficiency. By selecting arbitrators with the appropriate training and experience, parties can customize the arbitration procedure to suit their unique requirements. Nonetheless, the parties may mutually decide to use alternate dispute resolution procedures in place of arbitration.

The technique of conflict settlement that Alice chooses will rely on her preferences and particular circumstances. Litigation could be a preferable option if she values an official procedure with a judge's decision. On the other hand, Aqua Marine could favor arbitration if it thinks it has a strong case and can profit from lower expenses and a speedier result.Different conflict resolution techniques have varying degrees of efficacy depending on the following: intended results, time, legal complexity, and interpersonal dynamics. Before pursuing more structured procedures, parties may want to have a look at the less formal options that negotiation and mediation provide.

References

Goldberg, S. B., Sander, F. E., Rogers, N. H., & Cole, S. R. (2020).Dispute resolution: Negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and other processes. Aspen Publishing.

Ihya, R., Salam, A. Q., Bangsu, M., Hakim, R., & Hermawan, H. (2023). Arbitration in Agreement Dispute (Perspective of Law Number 30 Year 1999).Rechtsnormen Journal of Law,1(3), 141-150.https://doi.org/10.55849/rjl.v1i3.458

Lane, J., Bhome, R., & Somani, B. (2021). National trends and cost of litigation in UK National Health Service (NHS): a specialty-specific analysis from the past decade.Scottish Medical Journal,66(4), 168-174.https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2532278

Radovi, R. (2021).Beyond consent: revisiting jurisdiction in investment treaty arbitration(Vol. 18). Brill.

Sharma, U. (2020). Independence and Impartiality of Arbitral Tribunals: Legality of Unilateral Appointments.Indian J. Arb. L.,9, 121.https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage? handle=hein.journals/ijal9&div=11&id=&page