1.1 INTRODUCTION
ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is a litigation provision to parties involved in a case that have an alternative way to solving their case. Taking a case of Georgia, parties that have been involved in divorce cases normally seek for judge or a jury to help determine the solution to their cases. In the country, such cases are occasionally expensive, and more so lengthy as there are many processes involved; taking almost six months period before hearing is done and the final solution regarding the case is made. This is always costly and lengthy. Therefore, ADR enables parties to give an alternative solution that is crafted such that it lays a solution, which renders courts to decide on their matters.
1.2 General and Specific effects of ADR in Judicial case management
Generally, ADR process has been observed to be cost and time saving in terms of court cases management. The process is seen to be effective, especially in resolving civil cases although in some instances in the country, there are arguments that the effectiveness is not so much different in relation to other methods, such as litigation. Some findings argue that time as well as costs incurred are more or less the same. The reliability in sorting out the cases is seen to provide customer with satisfaction if you can relate with one done in the courts trial.
In the management of divorce cases, mediation is realized to give more satisfaction to the clients as compared to the traditional court trials. It is also less expensive both to the parties presenting the case as well as the court itself. Some forms employed in the process, such as compulsory mediation has been seen to be cost effective as there are low legal fees charged. It is also seen to carry a high rate of compliance for the parties participating in the case unlike in traditional court trial.
1.3 Why ADR Forms are a Preference in Many Judicial Processes
There are mainly three forms of ADR that are employed in resolving cases, whether general civil cases or family ones. These are mediation, which involves an independent adviser, such as a lawyer, arbitration that goes in the mid of mediation and court litigation and collaborative law that provides agreement of the participants not to mention court process.
Many jurisdiction processes have turned to the use of ADR method to supplement solution of divorce cases, because of various reasons benefits the method comes with. The major one is that the method is observed to be less adversarial. It is also casual in its approach to resolving the cases. This makes it better as compared to traditional court setting, which is always too long and tedious to finding solutions to the cases. The ADR method works to provide early settlement to cases as it employs simple approaches; for instance, mediation enables the parties to actively participate to resolve their dispute. Mediators intervene in the cases and take consideration of the collaborative family law as well. Decisions can be made and resolution reached even without parties such as the jury.
ADR is also beneficial since it works to reduce costs involved in carrying out the whole divorce cases. Normally, the case is always procedural and the parties involved at the end have to bear a big cost in finding the solution. The lengthy period involved also leads to piling of cases in the country courts, and therefore, this method offers an easy solution to reduce this load.
Mediation form which is used in most cases gives ability to the spouse to communicate to each other directly. In this they are able to air their views about their children especially if it is a case involving a dispute on children. They are also able to make their concerns as well as listening to the mediators suggestions concerning the care of children. This provides a chance for the best resolution which cannot be easily achieved through courts.
According to various research conducted, it is observed that the method is good because it has proved to yield full customer satisfaction. This is realized in the cases where the clients prefer to use the method again or even refer their friends as well.
1.4 Major effects of flow of jurisdiction cases due to ADR process
There are various effects that have been raised, especially relating to referral of cases due to introduction of the ADR process in the judicial system. Some include how the case should be referred. In this, it is provided by the law that the whole or just part of the case may be referred. However, the concern is on what part or content needs to be referred to ADR, and so on.
Another effect is related to the extent to which the court should get involved in the referral decision. This is due to many available links the ADR is attached to the court process, such as being mandatory or presumptive in which all matters can be referred. This allows exceptions and there are compulsory provisions for ADR given that there is no good reason to avoid. Another link can be through random allocation of the case to ADR and this may carry options that either allow exceptions or do not.
Other effect is on who pays the referral as well the ADR costs. There are costs involved in the process such as training, time needed to learn about the parties in addition to collecting more information concerning the case. The management process may incur some costs, especially on complex referral cases while the ADR process costs can be assumed by the main participants.
These are just some of the fewer effects in case flow management vis-à-vis the inclusion of ADR. There are others, which entails feeding back the responses on cases.
1.5 Short and long term costs and benefits on dollar and social levels
ADR dollar costs are seen to be minimal compared to court trials. The process takes a short time as well as low payments are incurred. It is more beneficial as much of the expenditure it reduced. In the long run, there are many cases resolved.
Socially, the process works to create harmony in the society since conflicting parties are brought to a common understanding and resolutions provided. This is beneficial both in the short term as well as in the long run. The recent statistics in Georgia reveals that ADR forms works to avoid negative publicity that may affect the social well being of the victims.
It has also been observed to improve long-term relationships among the parties since they are fairly controlled by independent overseer, for example, attorneys. This has been realized by the reduced number of post conflicts in the cases brought to court in the country.
In conclusion, ADR process is very reliable in helping solve cases in the judicial process. It works to reduce workload as well as improving the social relations in the society.
References
Stoner, K. (2012). Divorce without court: a guide to mediation & collaborative divorce. Berkeley, Calif: Nolo.
`Resnik, J. (2011). Representing justice: invention, controversy, and rights in city-states and democratic courtrooms. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Khan, S. (2006). Lok adalat: an effective alternative dispute resolution mechanism. New Delhi: A.P.H. Pub. House.
Roberts, S. (2005). Dispute processes: ADR and the primary forms of decision-making. Cambridge, UK New York: Cambridge University Press.
Steelman, D. (2004). Case flow management: the heart of court management in the new millennium. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.
