Search results

The relative merits of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) over conventional methods of dispute resolution, namely litigation and arbitration, is well documented, but as yet, the various ADR procedures currently available are not being extensively utilized within the construction industry in the UK. The purpose of the present paper was to discover from UK experts in dispute resolution why ADR has not become a more frequently used technique for resolving disputes in the UK construction industry, and to suggest ways in which this problem can be overcome. The findings indicate that there is a lack of understanding of the principles behind ADR and a lack of experience in dispute resolution in general. The findings strongly suggest that the lack of understanding and experience in ADR can best be overcome by educating and training. This should be carried out early on in the working lives of professionals by universities, professional institutions and specialist bodies such as the CEDR.

The purpose of this study is to examine the legal framework for court-annexed dispute resolution in courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria, Malaysia and Singapore. The major part of the study is dedicated to propose reforms in the administration of justice system in the courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria and the relevance of such reforms to the ongoing reforms in the Middle East and North African (MENA) countries.

This is an integrative literature review, which adopts a comparative approach in analyzing the conceptual framework of amicable dispute resolution in the modern world with particular reference to the Sharī‘ah court.

The findings of this research illustrate the adaptability of the practices in Malaysia and Singapore in the courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria and the MENA region.

An exposition of the dispute resolution processes in Islamic law reveals the relevance of these processes in modern reforms of the administration of justice system. The practical implications of this study include the streamlining of the rules and procedures of modern Sharī‘ah courts in post-revolution Arab countries to allow for court-annexed amicable (alternative) dispute resolution initiatives.

As far as it is known, this is the first conceptual study on the court-annexed dispute resolution frameworks of Sharī‘ah courts in three commonwealth jurisdictions.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

This paper aims to provide insight into mediation as an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to resolve interpersonal conflicts for undergraduate students in Hong Kong.

Mixed methods research approach was utilised to examine university students' understanding of dispute resolution at their respective universities in Hong Kong, and factors that may influence their decision to utilize ADR on campus.

The tendency for university students in Hong Kong to voice criticisms was low due to: (1) unawareness of proper grievance channels; and (2) fear of potential academic retribution from the institution. This may be the result of inadequate promotion and transparency in the existing higher education dispute resolution framework. Academic staff acknowledged the limitation of the existing closed-door dispute resolution system and the need for an alternative conflict management system which emphasises on restoration of harmony in the university community.

As there is a lack of study focusing on ADR practices in Hong Kong universities, this paper provides insight into the feasibility of integrating ADR into the existing dispute resolution processes in resolving interpersonal conflicts at universities in Hong Kong.

This paper aims to explore the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques as a legitimate means of ejection of recalcitrant tenant in property. This is with a view of providing information that will improve property investment and management.

The paper adopts a case study approach using five selected case studies where ADR approach was used to recover premises.

The experience from the case studies shows that the use of ADR in premises recovery is effective but has its challenges. In the five case studies, consent judgment, mediation and negotiation were used to recover premises in less than three months compared to an average of 18 months using litigation. Also, the cost in all the cases were lower where they exist at all than when litigation are used. The paper provides useful information to practitioners on the use of the effective alternative approach to recover premises from recalcitrant tenants.

The paper provides practical ways through which recovery of premises could be achieved through non-adversarial technique in developing property markets, which hitherto was not available in literature.

The purpose of this research is to discover the behavior of dispute resolution in the Malaysian construction industry by analyzing factors that affect the selection of dispute resolution methods using factor analysis approach.

Preliminary interviews and a questionnaire survey were conducted. Dispute resolution methods were grouped and discussed together, based on the similarity of their characteristics, and used for the questionnaire survey. This research approach is different from the earlier studies that mostly focused on a single dispute resolution method. The data were further analyzed with factor analysis. This improved the data interpretation.

Seven latent factors were extracted and revealed that the contractors and developers preferred alternative dispute resolution (ADR). However, the appreciation of the outcomes of ADR was perceived to be very low. Arbitration and litigation were in part accepted and agreed upon by the respondents.

The combined results from the literature review on the stages of dispute resolution and the latent factors affecting the selection of dispute resolution methods could assist in decision making. The selection of ADR or non‐ADR itself is not a major issue; rather, there is a concern for increased efficiency and an appreciation of the methods in the construction industry are more demanding.

Considers the benefits of the methods of dispute resolution used by the recently formed Centre for Dispute Resolution. Examines the CEDR′s techniques of mini‐trials and mediation, the reasons why negotiations fail, the features of ADR, the types of disputes that can be solved by ADR, salient features of CEDR, suitable mediators, ADR abroad, and model clauses. Concludes that while ADR cannot solve all disputes, the increase in use of ADR techniques cannot be restrained or ignored.

This paper aims to investigate the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques in the Palestinian construction industry. It also seeks to identify some of the drivers and barriers to the greater use of particular ADR techniques.

In this study, 12 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with senior ADR practitioners comprising nine construction professionals, two eminent lawyers and a retired judge.

This research has explored the practices of mediation, adjudication and expert evaluation in the Palestinian construction industry and has identified deficiencies in implementation and the roles that the cultural and legal contexts play in this. The research findings cast some doubt on the results of previous studies asserting the widespread use of construction mediation.

This paper contributes to knowledge by bringing new insight into the practice of particular ADR techniques in the Palestinian construction industry and in identifying challenges to the more widespread adoption of these ADR techniques. This paper exposes the myth of the popularity of construction mediation and the dilemma to the use of mediation brought by the social construction and conceptualisation of the mediator’s role.

The purpose of this article is to propose a conceptual framework for elucidating cross‐cultural paradoxes in dispute resolution and present a case study of a hybrid process that combines aspects of interest‐based mediation and indigenous dispute resolution in order to inform the design of conflict management systems in multinational enterprises (MNEs). Design/methodology/approach – A case study approach utilizing participant observation and informant feedback is used to present an organizational intervention in the Sri Lankan subsidiary of a European MNE. Discussion of the case is framed by theories of culture and conflict and a literature review of indigenous dispute resolution in Sri Lanka. Findings – The case illustrates how one MNE developed a culturally appropriate conflict management system in its subsidiary by crafting an innovative, informal channel for managing conflict and systematically embedding it into the organization alongside its formal conflict management process. Research limitations/implications – The case study approach limits the generalizability of the results. Future research should include a larger sample of countries, organizations, and dispute resolution practices, and incorporate feedback from employees to better assess the efficacy of the intervention. Practical implications – MNEs have an untapped opportunity to develop innovative approaches for managing conflict in their subsidiaries by melding interest‐based and indigenous mediation processes to develop culturally appropriate conflict management systems. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literatures on cross‐cultural conflict management and conflict management systems design by presenting an innovative approach to the application of hybrid dispute resolution mechanisms in MNEs. This study provides valuable insights for international managers, conflict systems design practitioners, and cross‐cultural conflict scholars.

This chapter discusses the adoption by Brazilian companies of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods for individual workplace conflicts. Brazil is an interesting case to study ADR due to its high level of institutionalized individual workplace conflicts and its extensive workplace statutory regulation. Investigating the case of three Brazilian private companies of different sectors and sizes, I found that Brazilian companies are developing their own ADR practices, focusing on ombudsman offices (OOs), instead of using the mediation and arbitration methods that are predominant in the United States. I argue that the adoption of the ombudsman can be explained by institutional and workplace level factors, which include the characteristics of Brazilian industrial relations system, each company’s human resources (HRs) strategy, and the relationship between companies and unions. Furthermore, I discuss how the usage rate of the OOs might vary according to the OO’s internal structure and its functioning rules. The cases provide important insights for scholars interested in ADR in general and in Brazilian industrial relations system, as well as union leaders, HR managers, and other practitioners dealing with workplace conflicts globally.