1.) The thee primary advantages of alternate dispute resolution (ADR) are decreased costs of litigation, convenience, and time savings. Generally, an ADR cause of action is begun as the result of a prior agreement to enter into ADR by the parties, accordingly, if a dispute arises, the parties rarely need to expend huge sums of money trying to figure out if they have a case and how to go about resolving it. Similarly, ADR saves the time that would normally be needed in the more traditional litigation. This is also true for convenience, in the with ADR is no need to go through the litigation process. Conversely, there are two main disadvantages of ADR. First, is that, oftentimes in an ADR case there is no recourse if a party disagrees with a ruling. In other words, courts will rarely overturn a private agreement. The second disadvantage is that there are less formalities that govern who can preside over or decide an ADR action such as the professional and ethical rules that regulate lawyers and judges. Accordingly, ADR personnel could be susceptible to the demands of one party over the other. Whether I would be more inclined to use ADR as opposed to litigation would depend to the particular case. Some cases are much better for ADR to resolve than the court. For instance, a customer lawsuit or a contractual dispute seems more suitable to ADR as it most likely mainly involves misunderstandings between parties that are better mediated than the winner-takes-all aspect of litigation.
2.) One of the more recently well-known arbitration cases is the one that occurred between the New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and the National Football League (NFL) over the league’s decision to suspend Brady for his involvement in knowingly facilitating the deflation of game balls in violation of league policy. The key issue of the arbitration was whether or not Brady’s actions were “conduct detrimental” to the league and whether Roger Goodell had the power and authority to issue and suspension for such actions (Malin, 2016). The reason that there was an arbitration was that the NFL and the NFL Players Association, which represents Brady had a contractual agreement to resolve dispute related to, among other aspects of the game, playing in the NFL, via ADR. The case was originally resolved in favor of the NFL but Brady appealed the decision to the court system. The appeal was rendered, again, in favor of the NFL. Brady will not play for the first four games of the 2016 football season.
References
Malin, M.H. (2016, May 31). Deflategate, Tom Brady and labor arbitration. Retrieved from http://law.missouri.edu/arbitrationinfo/2016/05/31/deflategate-tom-brady-and-labor-arbitration-by-professor-martin-h-malin/
