KEMBAR78
Disadvantages of Using ADR | PDF
Scribd
Upload
520 views2 pages

Disadvantages of Using ADR

The document discusses potential disadvantages of using alternative dispute resolution (ADR). There may be power imbalances between parties, urgency in some matters requires immediate legal remedies, and one party may be unwilling to participate in ADR. ADR does not establish legal precedents, make rulings on legal rights, and can take a long time for some processes like ombudsman investigations.

Uploaded by

Tarang Sarawgi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
520 views2 pages

Disadvantages of Using ADR

The document discusses potential disadvantages of using alternative dispute resolution (ADR). There may be power imbalances between parties, urgency in some matters requires immediate legal remedies, and one party may be unwilling to participate in ADR. ADR does not establish legal precedents, make rulings on legal rights, and can take a long time for some processes like ombudsman investigations.

Uploaded by

Tarang Sarawgi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

DISADVANTAGES OF USING ADR

There are some situations when ADR may not be appropriate and may even be
risky for one of the parties.
There are some of the factors one should think about:

1. Power differences
There may be an imbalance of power between the parties, which could make face-
to-face ADR unfair. Mediation between an individual and a large organisation such
as a local authority or company, where the size and resources of the organisation
could put the individual at a disadvantage.

2. Urgency of the matter


There may be an urgent need (for example if you are threatened with being evicted
or losing your home) which requires an immediate legal remedy.

3. Reluctant opponent
ADR requires both parties to be willing to give it a try, so if the other side is not
willing to mediate, you might need to go to court instead.

4. No precedent
Agreements reached in mediation do not act as precedents in future cases. They
are usually private and confidential. If you need to establish a legal point that other
people can rely on, you may need to go to court.

5. No ruling on legal rights and entitlements


You cannot get a ruling on your legal rights, including discrimination and human
rights, in ADR processes. You can still resolve a dispute about these issues, but
you won’t get a decision about whether or not the law has been broken.
6. Can take a long time
Ombudsmen investigations can be very slow – even up to a year or more for an
investigation.

7. Lower compensation amounts


Research shows that in mediation of small claims cases, settlement amounts tend to
be lower than amounts claimed. If you need a significant sum of money in
compensation, then you might get a higher award through the court.

8. Binding decisions
Arbitration, and often adjudication, are processes that result in legally binding
decisions. This means that you cannot reject the decision if you don’t like it, and
you can’t take the claim to court instead.

9. Quality control
There are no consistent quality standards or regulation for ADR making it difficult
for parties to choose a good service.

10. No free legal aid for ADR in India

You might also like