Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Dispute resolution; Litigation'

Magister Legum - LLM
Alternative dispute resolution refers to forms of dispute resolution, other than traditional and formal court based litigation. A notable benefit of alternative dispute resolution is that different processes are available for resolving a particular dispute in the most effective and efficient manner possible. Alternative dispute resolution includes but is not limited to arbitration, mediation, negotiation, conciliation and facilitation. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, lists human dignity, equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms as the founding values of the Republic of South Africa. In terms of section 9(1) of the Constitution everyone is regarded as equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law in South Africa. Often it is however argued that traditional court based litigation hinders the full enjoyment of these rights by individuals. Consequently, alternative dispute resolution is attractive as an alternative to court based litigation as it is regarded as less expensive, more time effective and results in less conflict when it comes to resolving disputes in the most accessible, effective and efficient manner possible, in both developed and developing countries. The study will first focus on the pitfalls to traditional court based litigation in South Africa. The relevant legislation and processes which provide for alternative dispute resolution processes in South Africa, with specific focus on alternative dispute resolution in labour disputes, will be considered. Consideration will be given to the provision of alternative dispute resolution as contained in the Constitution, the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings before the CCMA of 2003 and the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965. The study will thereafter proceed to consider the use of alternative dispute resolution in labour disputes in Brazil, Russia, India and China, who, together with South Africa, are collectively referred to as BRICS. These five nations are considered the world’s leading emerging economies, with similar economic capabilities and demographics.

The construction industry has been plagued with an increasing number of claims and high litigation costs. How do we reduce conflict and litigation in the construction process? On one hand, leaders of the construction industry in the United States (US) focused their efforts on improving alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. For instance, the American Society of Civil Engineers has introduced the Dispute Review Board (DRB) as a complementary provision to standard US construction practices. The establishment of the DRB to solve construction disputes on the job, avoid claims, and reduce project costs has proven considerable success. On the other hand, construction industry leaders in the United Kingdom (UK) have focused some of their efforts on improving general contract conditions. The Council of the Institution of Civil Engineers of the UK has introduced the New Engineering Contract (NEC) to the construction industry as an alternative to presently used contracts. The NEC proposes to be an innovative, non-adversarial mechanism to resolve disputes on the job, avoid and reduce claims, and to assuage rising litigation costs in the construction industry. It too has proven considerable success in its efforts. This research concentrates on the DRB and the NEC as attempts by construction leaders to modernize and improve construction practices. In summary, the research compares the success stories of the DRB and the NEC as approaches to combating the adversarial nature, increasing number of disputes and rising litigation costs in the construction industry. The main conclusions ascertained in this research are as follows. Despite coming from similar business environments, construction industry leaders in the US and the UK embarked on different methods to address the issues plaguing the industry and to improve construction practices. Both in the US and the UK, construction leaders were mostly influenced to proactively seek and implement change in construction practices by experts from within the engineering and construction industry vanguard. The undertaking of these changes have shown similar success stories and the results have produced substantial impacts on the construction process. In conclusion, the efforts of construction leaders to implement the DRB and the NEC have provided effective mechanisms in improving communication and relations, and managing disputes in a timely fashion at the job site level.
Master of Science

Magister Legum - LLM
Civil litigation is the primary method of dispute resolution in the South African civil justice system. This process is characterised by a number of shortcomings which include the adversarial nature of the process which often creates further conflict between disputing parties and often results in permanently destroyed relationships between them. Further shortcomings include the highly complex, costly and time-consuming nature of civil litigation. These shortcomings infringe on the constitutional imperative of access to justice for South Africans, particularly for the indigent members of society. In addition, court rolls have become overburdened due to the rapidly increasing volume of litigation at court. This often results in extensive waiting periods before matters are heard at court and further infringes the attainment of access to justice. While progress has been made in enhancing the civil justice system over the years, the aforementioned shortcomings prevail. In recent years the South African government has introduced the concept of mandatory court based mediation to the civil justice system with the view of promoting access to justice and enhancing the civil justice system. In a nutshell, mandatory court based mediation refers a civil dispute to mediation once an appearance to defend is entered at court, in order to attempt the settlement of the matter. In the event of the dispute not being resolved, the matter is then referred back to the conventional litigation process for resolution. Mandatory court based mediation, while controversial and bearing valid criticism; aims to promote access to justice and reconciliation between aggrieved parties and remedies a number of the shortcomings currently plaguing the South African civil justice system. In answering the research question of whether this ADR process is suitable to implement in South Africa in order to remedy the shortcomings of its civil justice system, the following aspects are considered in this thesis: the benefits, advantages, and the constitutionality of mandatory court based mediation, as well as the criticisms and challenges of the process. South Africa may have an adversarial civil justice system, but is no stranger to the practice of mediation. Within South African civil law a number of fields have mentioned mediation as the preferred method of dispute resolution over years. These areas of law will be highlighted in this thesis. Internationally, the jurisdiction of the Australian states of New South Wales and Victoria will also be highlighted. This analysis is done in order to assess the implementation and function of a mediation system, as a preferred method of dispute resolution, across all areas of civil law within an adversarial civil justice system. The current civil justice system in South Africa needs to be remedied due to its negative impact on civil disputants and the nation of South Africa in a broader sense. This thesis does not suggest that mandatory court based mediation is a panacea for all ills plaguing the country’s civil justice system. However, this ADR process may suit South Africa and its implementation may make a considerable remedial contribution and possibly significantly enhance its civil justice system.

Magister Legum - LLM
The judicial court system in South Africa is overburdened, which results in parties having to wait for long periods of time to have their matters settled or even heard. Furthermore, the cost of litigation in South Africa is immense, which prevents the biggest part of the population from access to justice in line with s 34 of the Constitution of 1996. Therefore, alternative methods of dispute resolution are worth looking into. This paper will compare the mediation system of South Africa with that of Germany. This will allow for a better insight in regard to mediation within South Africa, which can help to address the above stated problems.

This research examines the effectiveness of these dispute resolution mechanisms in environmental disputes and what improvements should be made in order to make those mechanisms suitable for these types of disputes.

Includes abstract.
Includes bibliographical references.
The need for a viable alternative to court litigation of intellectual property disputes is much needed in modern legal systems. IP court litigation has become expensive, time consuming, and poor decision making has led to unpredictable and inconsistent results. This paper explores the possibility of using alternative methods, such as mediation and arbitration, to resolve complex IP disputes. The paper critiques modern judicial systems and analyses how alternative methods may be better suited to the resolution of IP disputes. Particular attention is paid to the issues present in the South African legal system and what steps are needed to implement a workable and regulated alternative to the High Court system. The paper concludes that alternative dispute mechanisms are well suited to the resolution of IP disputes but that South Africa needs to take progressive steps towards the realisation of such a system.

Since the 1970s there has been a growing interest in, and utilisation of, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques to resolve environmental conflicts in western societies. ADR was incorporated into one of New Zealand's main environmental statutes, the Resource Management Act 1991(RMA). Under s.268 of the RMA the Environment Court (the Court) may, if the parties agree, conduct mediation in order to facilitate settlement of resource management disputes. The RMA, which has now been in operation for ten years, gives no guidance as to the way in which mediation is to be conducted. The Court has developed procedures and processes for administering and conducting mediation. This study critically evaluates the practice of Court assisted mediation of environmental disputes under the RMA. A literature review and interviews with stakeholder groups are used in this evaluation. The study shows that mediation generates benefits for the Court and participants. It also identifies limitations with the current mediation procedures and processes. These may impact the effectiveness of participants in mediation, their satisfaction with, and support for, the mediated settlement and with the environmental outcomes. The study recommends a series of guidelines be prepared on the functions and administrative procedures of the Court and on the mediation process promoted by the Court. Further research is also recommended. It is considered that these recommendations, if implemented, will enhance the process for participants, ensure more equitable and consistent environmental outcomes, in terms of present and future generations, and retain public confidence in the mediation process.

Direito processual civil, Mediação e conciliação, Reforma judiciária
The proliferation of individual claims repeating factual and/or legal matters have inspired procedural reforms aimed at the standardization of judgments, the consolidation of precedents and the collectivization of individual claims and searching for effectiveness and legal certainty. Another important response to this repeated litigation is the promotion of consensual dispute resolution, especially conciliation and mediation in the courts. This research investigates how consensual mechanisms are used by courts to deal with repeated litigation and which are the practices and techniques specifically aimed at repeated disputes. The characteristic elements of these repeated disputes are the similarity of the factual and/or legal arguments, the representativeness of the volume of claims and the fact that one of the parties litigates in similar disputes more often, while the other in involved in such type of cases only occasionally. These repeat players are known as the great litigants of the Judiciary, and enjoy certain advantages in terms of bargaining power, resources and information in view of their size and the frequency with which they are involved with similar cases. An empirical research was carried out court programs in Brazil and the United States to study the perceptions of the actors involved in the design and operation these programas on the issues raised. It was found that repeated litigation is a crucial part of court conciliation and mediation programs, influencing the role of the main stakeholders (parties, lawyers and conciliators/mediators), screening and case management practices, access conditions, specific techniques and the role played the Judiciary, who shall also act as manager, designer and institutional mediator. It is concluded that the structure of these programs and the role of those involved can be key factors for an adequate treatment of repeated disputes in the judicial context.

La dématérialisation des méthodes de traitement, de transmission et de conservation de l’information modifie substantiellement les rapports économiques et sociaux. Le domaine juridique n’aurait pu rester étranger à ce mouvement de fond. Le droit et la justice s’en trouvent bouleversés jusque dans leurs organisations, leurs méthodes et leurs métiers. L’adaptation du droit aux technologies numériques désormais acquise, les craintes et résistances liées à leur intégration dans le fonctionnement judiciaire surmontées ; la dématérialisation des actes du procès et leur communication électronique se généralisent. Une phase de maturation débute à présent, celle d’un retour au droit de la procédure civile et de l’appréciation que la jurisprudence fera de ces innovations technologiques. Il conviendra dès lors de veiller à ce que cette appropriation serve pleinement les intérêts des justiciables et de la justice
Paperless methods of data production, process and records management has substantially changed both the economic and social relationships. Therefore, French law and justice could not have ignored these technological evolution which is deeply impacting their own organisation, methods, and professions. The necessary adaptation by French law and Justice to digital technologies now acquired, and concerns or fears on their integration into the civil litigation process being overcome ; dematerialisation of procedural acts and their communication in electronic forms are generally used. Regarding this technological reality, attention needs henceforth to be directed towards the role of each relevant actor of the French E-justice to make sure that such proceedings allow a fair trial to any litigant

Le règlement de différends dans le secteur des communications électroniques est un mécanisme quasi-juridictionnel particulier, à mi-chemin entre droit public et droit privé. Mis en œuvre au sein de l’ARCEP, régulateur sectoriel sous le statut d’autorité administrative indépendante, ce mécanisme, qui s’est progressivement structuré et ouvert au fil du temps, produit néanmoins un contentieux spécialisé. En effet, il ne concerne en pratique que les seuls opérateurs réglementairement qualifiés et a pour objet la défense d’un droit économique : l’accès, matérialisé par le droit à l’interconnexion. Cet accès aux réseaux des opérateurs en présence est vital pour le développement et le maintien d’un marché ouvert et atomisé. Dès lors, l’intérêt d’une étude approfondie sur le règlement de différends dans le secteur des télécommunications est multiple. D’abord, les protagonistes du contentieux évoluent : avec la redéfinition actuelle du statut d’opérateur par l’émergence des collectivités locales (Article L1425-1 CGCT) et l’irruption plus récente d’acteurs utilisant la couche supérieure du réseau (i.e. diffusant seulement du contenu, appelés OTT, pour over-the-top). Puis, la procédure élaborée par le législateur interroge : pourquoi impliquer une personne publique dans des négociations commerciales entre personnes privées ? La dualité du contentieux, oscillant apparemment entre contentieux public en première instance et contentieux privé pour l’appel ne fait que renforcer un peu plus cette singularité qu’il convient d’analyser plus avant. De plus, avec un marché en consolidation et une Europe en intégration, du moins économiquement, la question de l’avenir d’un tel mécanisme se pose, dont la plus récente réforme inclut désormais de possibles cas de contentieux communautaires, avec la participation du BEREC comme organe consultatif. Enfin, notons une place importante accordée aux témoignages et aux expériences de celles et ceux qui font vivre ce contentieux, constituant une tentative d’apporter un éclairage de sociologie juridique à cette étude, entre théorie et pratique d’un contentieux particulier de la régulation
Dispute resolution is a very specific legal tool, mixing private and public legal elements. The ARCEP, the National Regulatory Authority in France is in charge to regulate the sector and has the power to litigate disputes about interconnection or access. Established in 1996, the ARCEP developed a certain practice of this type of disputes, elaborating a specialized litigation to enforce the right to interconnection, granted by European laws. Such a right is vital for operators in order for them to be able to compete with the incumbent. Consequently, efficiently resolving every dispute to keep market competitive is crucial. Studying such a mechanism has several interests. Firstly, the very concept of operator evolves. Local authorities now have the ability to intervene and deploy networks available for other operators and even the public. More, over-the-top actors providing content services on the Internet have an increasing impact on the networks and they are now competing operators on telecommunications services. Secondly, the procedure is debatable: how a public body can intervene on commercial contracts? As France has a bi-jurisdictional order, splitting courts between private law and administrative law, dispute resolution changes this traditional way, making administrative decisions appealed at the Cour d’Appel de Paris. Lastly, the growing scaling up of the market, from national to European level, questions the ability of ARCEP’s mechanism to evolve.Using a mixed method, combining theoretical and practical approach, we aim to explain how this specific way to make regulation is a real asset for competition

Taika suteikia galimybę užtikrinti santykių darną, abipusį supratimą, kiekvienam bendrų ir visiems skirtingų poreikių patenkinimą. Taikos siekimas reikalauja įtempto darbo ir didelių pastangų: siekiant taikos, einama lygybės, kompromiso ir abipusės (daugiašalės) satisfakcijos kryptimi. Tik pačios konfliktuojančios šalys žino, koks rezultatas joms būtų priimtinas, patenkinantis jų interesus, teikiantis pasitenkinimą konkrečioje situacijoje ir užkertantis kelią atsinaujinantiems nesutarimams dėl to paties dalyko. Civilinių teisinių santykių subjektų ginčas efektyviai gali būti išsprendžiamas taikos sutartimi. Šio teisinio instrumento panaudojimas ginčo sureguliavimui įgalina pasiekti bendrą sprendimą, dažniausiai šalis įpareigojantį ir vykdomą dėl jo priimtinumo susitariantiesiems. Magistrinio darbo tikslas – išanalizuoti Lietuvos Respublikos teismams pateikiamų tvirtinti civilinius teisinius santykius reglamentuojančių taikos sutarčių turinio ypatumus. Darbe glaustai analizuojama lietuvių ir užsienio mokslinės literatūros šaltiniuose bei šalies teisės aktuose įtvirtinta taikos sutarties samprata, įvardijami taikos sutarties turiniui ir formai keliami reikalavimai, apžvelgiami taikos sutartimis išsprendžiamų konfliktų ypatumai, nustatomos taikos sutarčių panaudojimo praktikoje problemos, samprotaujama apie teismuose patvirtintų taikos sutarčių turinio įvertinimo kokybę. Atsižvelgiant į magistriniame darbe atliktą Lietuvos Respublikos teismuose patvirtintų taikos sutarčių... [toliau žr. visą tekstą]
Peace enables to ensure consistency of terms, mutual understanding, satisfaction of each common and all different needs. The pursuit of peace requires hard work and huge efforts: in the process of striving for peace, the course of equality, compromise and mutual (multilateral) satisfaction has to be set. It is only the conflicting parties know what the result would be acceptable to them to fit their interests, satisfying in a given situation and preventing from renewable disagreements on the same issue. Legal relations in civil litigation can be effectively resolved with the settled contract. The application of this legal instrument allows resolving the dispute and arriving to common decision, usually binding and thus enforceable due to its acceptability for both contracting parties. The aim of this masters’ theses is to analyze the specific features of the content of settlements of civil legal relations submitted for approval to the courts of the Republic of Lithuania. The paper briefly analyzes the concept of settled contracts embedded in Lithuanian and foreign sources and national legislation, identifies the content and format requirements; an overview of specific features of settled contracts in resolved conflicts are presented, problems of practical applications of settled contracts are determined, the quality assessment of the content of settled contracts approved in courts is considered. Taking into account the analysis of the approved settled contracts in the courts... [to full text]

A conciliação judicial de conflitos previdenciários envolve, em geral, uma proposta de acordo baseada na renúncia pelo indivíduo de parte dos valores do benefício em atraso em um processo no qual a decisão contrária ao entendimento do Instituto Nacional do Segurado Social (INSS) é muito provável. Como regra, há um notório desequilíbrio de poder envolvendo, de um lado, um litigante ocasional (indivíduo) e, de outro, um litigante habitual (INSS). O presente trabalho pretende discutir qual o papel do terceiro facilitador nesse contexto, de modo a legitimar a prática existente e avançar para uma mudança de paradigma. Para tanto, parte-se da tese de que a conciliação deve ser adequada ao conflito que se pretende tratar, cabendo ao terceiro facilitador atuar de acordo com as peculiaridades desse conflito. Desse modo, propõe-se que, para o tratamento do conflito previdenciário, o conceito de conciliador deve ser entendido em termos amplos, abrangendo não apenas o conciliador leigo, mas também o juiz conciliador e o Judiciário como conciliador interinstitucional. Embora cada uma dessas atuações possua características próprias, sustenta-se que o ponto em comum é o respeito a um devido processo legal mínimo que possibilite a existência de uma base adequada de poder e que permita, assim, a tomada de uma decisão informada pelas partes. Dessa forma, a flexibilidade instrumental própria da conciliação não impediria o estabelecimento de parâmetros mínimos da atuação do conciliador. Por isso, tendo como limite a tomada de uma decisão informada, o conciliador atuaria por meio de estratégias variadas, aproximando-se e distanciando-se das partes, com maior ou menor interferência, de acordo com as características do caso apresentado. Conclui-se que, com a atuação conjunta e coordenada das diversas espécies de conciliador é possível aprimorar qualitativamente a conciliação de conflitos previdenciários.
The court-connected conciliation (or evaluative mediation) of pension funds conflicts in Brazil involves, generally, an agreement in which the individual plaintiff waives part of a benefit in a lawsuit that the defendant, a national government agency called Instituto Nacional do Seguro Social (INSS), will probably loose. As a general rule, there is a significant imbalance of power between a one-shotter (individual) and a repeat player (INSS). The present work aims to discuss the role of the conciliator (or evaluative mediator) in this scenario, in order to legitimate the current practice and to allow a paradigm shift. Firstly, it argues that conciliation should be appropriate to the conflict to be resolved and that the conciliator also should act according to the peculiarities of this conflict. Therefore, it proposed that the definition of conciliator might be enlarged to cover not only the lay person who acts as a conciliator, but also the judge as a conciliator and the Judiciary as an interinstitutional conciliator. Although each specie has its own characteristics, it is argued that the common point is that all must try to guarantee the observance of a minimal due process of law which allows the existence of an adequate basis of power and thus enable parties to make an informed decision. Consequently, the flexibility of the conciliation rules would not prevent the establishment of minimum standards of the conciliator\'s performance. Limited by the aim to allow parties to make an informed decision, the conciliator would act through a variety of strategies. It means being close or far from the parties, interfering in a greater or a smaller level, depending on the characteristics of a particular conflict to be dealt. To sum up, this work concludes that, if the three species of conciliator work together in a coordinated way, it could be possible to have a qualitative improvement in the conciliation of pension funds conflicts.

Les profondes mutations du commerce international, avec en particulier l'émergence de nouvelles puissances économiques et l’accélération de la révolution numérique, nous invitent à revoir les distinctions traditionnelles entre les différents droits de l'arbitrage. Si l'on peut observer un mouvement d'uniformisation des droits dans les pays occidentaux, en particulier avec une convergence des droits de Common Law et des droits continentaux, qu'en est-il dans les pays qualifiés hier d’ « émergents »? Assiste-t-on à ce même phénomène ? Des particularismes ressortent-ils? L'objet de cette thèse sera d'examiner les spécificités de quatre grands pays - la Chine, l’Inde, le Brésil et le Mexique - dont le poids démographique et économique ne cesse de croître dans les échanges internationaux. Dans une démarche comparative, nous nous intéresserons spécifiquement à la convention d'arbitrage, clé de voûte du droit de l’arbitrage, afin d’essayer de comprendre la philosophie et le traitement réservé à ce mode de règlement des différends dans chacun des ces pays. Cela nous conduira à nous interroger sur la place actuelle du droit français de l’arbitrage, longtemps considéré comme avant-gardiste, et sur son influence dans les années à venir
The profound changes in international trade, particularly in light of the emergence of new economic powers and the acceleration of the Digital Revolution, lead us to revisit the traditional distinctions between the different national arbitration laws. While a movement of standardization of national laws has been observed in Western countries, particularly with a tendency of convergence between Common Law and Civil Law jurisdictions, what about the countries that were qualified yesterday as "emerging"? Is the same phenomenon true for the them and Do particularisms emerge? The purpose of this thesis will be to examine the specificities of four major countries - China, India, Brazil and Mexico - whose demographic and economic weight is growing in international trade day by day. Through a comparative approach, we will focus specifically on the arbitration agreement, being the keystone of arbitration law, in order to try to understand the philosophy and treatment reserved to this dispute resolution method in each of these countries. This will inevitably lead to question the current place of French law, long considered as avant-garde, and its influence in the years to come

Le transport maritime par conteneurs est devenu universel compte tenu de son caractère multimodal. Le succès de ce mode de transport est aussi lié à l’implication de plusieurs professionnels tant du monde privé que du monde public. Cependant, le transport de conteneurs constitue un univers de contentieux parfois inconnus. L’usage de ces boîtes fait l’objet de contentieux de nature privé, mais également des contentieux de nature administrative. Bien que des Conventions internationales règlementent le transport maritime en général, l’inadaptation de certaines de ces normes ne facilite pas la résolution de ces contentieux. Et, comme l’administration des douanes est en amont et en aval dans l’exécution du contrat de transport, son intervention ne reste pas sans soulever des contentieux dont la résolution implique deux ordres de juridictions
The container shipping has become universal because of its multimodal nature. The success of this mean of transport is also linked to the involvement of many professionals from both private and public sectors. However, the container shipping constitutes a field of litigation sometime ignored. The use of these boxes involves not only litigations of private nature but also of administrative nature. Although some international conventions regulate shipping in general, the unsuitability of some of these norms does not help the settlement of these litigations. And, as the customs administration is upstream and downstream involved in the execution of the contract of carriage, its involvement is a source of disputes whose settlement implies two different kinds of courts

The broad scope of this research concerns the field of conflict and dispute resolution, also referred to as alternative dispute resolution (ADR). ADR practices have developed in both executive and judicial branches of government since the early 1900’s. The goal of this paper is to evaluate how ADR practitioners working in water-related civil litigation can apply facilitative practices prior, during, and after the proceeding to reduce harm, cost, and time of litigation and increase the overall satisfaction of the parties when the proceeding has been resolved. To achieve this goal, a framework is constructed and applied to a case study in Cascade Locks, Oregon. This framework is not a way to avoid a court proceeding through use of alternative dispute resolution; instead this paper seeks to add facilitative practices to a civil litigation process to make the entire process more efficient to the parties and effective in resolving the dispute.

碩士
國立高雄第一科技大學
風險管理與保險研究所
103
In order to protect the interests of financial consumers and to fairly, reasonably and effectively handle financial consumer disputes, thereby reinforcing the financial consumers in markets and promoting development of financial markets, the Legislative Yuan passed the Financial Consumer Protection Act on June 3, 2011, and enforced it since 2012. Moreover, the Financial Ombudsman Institution (FOI) is established and effectively resolves disputes between financial consumer and financial services enterprise. However, the processing is doubtful. Therefore, this study investigated ’’a study on insurance dispute resolution and derivative litigation of financial consumers protection act’’. Based on the law regulation, then observing the practice and formal principle, we could clarify the litigation cases of the matters in dispute. This study investigated that because the insurance companies are equipped with the economic status and professional knowledge of insurance, the policy holders are placed in a minority. In addition, after rejecting the aftermath, the policy holders should have the right of ‘’veto power’’, ‘’review’’ and ‘’testify’’ in the future.

Medical negligence is a growing concern within South Africa.1 The medical environment has great potential for conflict, because even the best trained physicians can commit errors that result in medical disabilities and sometimes in death.2 The conflicts that follow from these errors are mostly fuelled by emotions and they can become very expensive and time-consuming to settle using the litigation process.3 There is a growing recognition that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems in healthcare may alleviate some of the financial and psychological burdens on doctors and patients involved in medical negligence disputes. Mediation is a method of ADR that is flexible and it permits the parties to the dispute to have control over the resolution. A typical medical negligence dispute is driven by intensely emotional factors on the part of injured patients. Victims are not merely seeking financial compensation but they are also looking to understand the circumstances that brought on the event at hand. They want closure. A huge issue with regard to medical negligence litigation is the manner in which the claims are resolved. Litigation provides injured patients and caregivers with a traditional platform for addressing medical negligence claims. However, due to many reasons, this system seems not to be adequate for dealing with disputes arising from alleged medical negligence. Mediation offers a promising solution to the problems surrounding redress of medical negligence disputes.
Jurisprudence
LL. M.

Persuasion scholars have documented the use of compliance-gaining messages in both negotiation and negotiation. The extant research offers suggestions for litigators and negotiators, but fails to compare the methods of persuasion in the two circumstances in order to advise attorneys and clients which communication messages to employ in the different contexts. The present study explores differences in use of 7 common compliance-gaining message strategies (“It's Up To You”, “This Is The Way Things Are”, “Equity”, “Benefit (Other)”, “Bargaining”, and “Cooperation”; Kellerman, 2004) in separate negotiation and litigation cases. Findings indicate that “This Is The Way Things Are” messages were more frequent in litigation than negotiation, but “Cooperation” messages were more common in negotiation than litigation. No other significant differences in strategy frequency across the different contexts were found. These results indicate that some differences exist between the messages used in negotiation and litigation and that future research should investigate what other messages may be used differently in the two contexts.
text

The system of Alternative Dispute Resolution, commonly known as ADR, comprises multiple informal processes. Traditional processes of negotiation, mediation and arbitration are primary processes within the system of ADR. The elements of the primary processes have been combined with one another or with those of public process to form hybrid ADR processes original only to the system of ADR. These hybrid processes are: rent-a-judge, the mini-trial, the summary jury trial, neutral evaluation and mediation/arbitration. Under the auspices of ADR, derivative processes have also been developed, such as expedited arbitration, documents-only arbitration, final-offer arbitration and quality arbitration. Each process is distinct and separate, having its own unique form, function and method of transforming a dispute. Outwardly, this represents a diverse collection of disjunctive processes. Yet an introspective analysis shows that there is an innate centrality that originates in core principles that bind individual processes to each other and to a unified body of theory. These foundational principles of ADR are replicated in each of its processes. In these terms, ADR is therefore conceptualised as a pluralistic system of dispute resolution that consists of autonomous and individual systems of process that conform to a central body of general theory and consensual principles. As a method of extracting the fundamental principles of ADR, the discontinuities and continuities between the theory and principles of civil procedure, as a unitary system .of procedure, and ADR processes are explored. However, in its conclusions, the thesis rejects the premises of a unitary system of procedure as forming the basis for the theory and principles of ADR. Instead, the contrary notion is advanced that ADR is an independent system of dispute resolution which is based on a theory of processual pluralism and supported by cogent processual principles.
Constitutional, International & Indigenous Law
LL.D.

This Master of Laws dissertation is a treatise of “The efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in labour disputes: a critical comparative analysis of Botswana, South Africa (RSA) and Zimbabwe.” Alternative Dispute Resolution hereinafter referred to as (“ADR”) has attracted so much research ado worldwide with policy makers alive to its possibilities in so far as it ought to shed off the burden of the courts in handling disputes. Courts are considered inundated with unresolved cases taking many years to finalise. ADR is therefore touted, not only the panacea, but the cheaper, efficient and effective alternative to normal court process. This study was saddled with the common challenges of definition, scope and methodology as does most scientific studies, especially to locate the concept ADR in the plethora of views from prominent exponent-s of the discipline. This study labored on the considered view that ADR is essentially an ‘out of court settlement approach to dispensing with disputes involving an attempt by disputants to rope in an impartial third party to aid finality to the respective wrangle. The lack of a methodological approach to treat this subject matter, made this study more challenging. The study had to therefore rely on a hypothetical model developed after gleaning through various scholarly views 1 that sought to treat the subject of ADR efficacy in labour dispute resolution. The study contented with the strongly held view 2 that ADR is an efficacious approach in resolving disputes outside the court system. As to whether this was the case in Botswana, RSA and Zimbabwe in so far as labour dispute resolution is concerned was the major challenge this study was seized with? A model was formulated which envisaged that efficaciousness of ADR may be achieved if three conditions or criteria are present within a jurisdiction, namely (1) ADR Background Conditions that comprise (a) adequate legislative and political support; (b) Supportive institutional and cultural norms, (c) adequate and competent manpower, (d) sufficient funding support, and (e) power-parity of disputants; (2) ADR Program Design comprising of (a) Planning and preparation and (b) Operations and implementation and finally (3) ADR Measures (a) Client satisfaction; (b) Time efficient; (c) Cost saving and (d) Settlement & enforcement. This study measured the situations obtaining in the three countries using these three-pronged criteria. In all three measures3 this study found that although all the three countries still have a long way before their ADR became as efficacious as would be reasonably possible, RSA has made many strides such as legislative enactments immediately upon attaining independence that sought to address the injustices of the past and thereby installing structures for enforcing industrial democracy 4, while Botswana and Zimbabwe took 5 years 5 and over 10 years 6 respectively after attaining independence. RSA established an independent body for dispensing with labour dispute settlement7 while Botswana8 and Zimbabwe 9 are still reluctant to do so, relying rather on their labour ministries often marinated in bureaucratic bottlenecks hence stalling efficacy of ADR. While RSA makes effort to provide adequate and competent manpower because of sufficient funding, Botswana and Zimbabwe still struggle to dispense with disputes under their labour departments who are either inadequately skilled or also accused of favouritism in the case of Zimbabwe.10 All the three countries are regarded as unequal societies which tends to sway the power-parity of disputants with capitalists still wielding unbridled powers in dispute outcomes. South Africa enacted section 143 to the Labour Relations Act 11 which empowers the Director of CCMA to certify an arbitral award, giving it the same force as an order of the Magistrate Court. This has cut off the time and administrative burden of having to register an arbitral award with the court so as to obtain writs of executions and enforce it, a practice which is still prevalent in Zimbabwe. The Department of Labour in South Africa has made funding available to the CCMA to assist employees who are not in a financial position to enforce awards in their favour.12 The funding is aimed at employees who are too indigent to afford the costs of enforcement.13 These employees are deemed to be: (a) Employees who earn below the earnings threshold (currently at R205 433.30 per annum) – proof of income will be required by the CCMA. There is no record regarding enforcement or ease of enforcement of ADR outcomes in Botswana and Zimbabwe or at least this study is aware of. The governments of Botswana and Zimbabwe have been accused of using a heavy hand in determining wages, the right to strike and often curtailing union power through declaring certain sectors essential services. RSA’s Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration hereinafter after referred to as (the “CCMA”)14 runs an electronic system of case management by which cases are screened and assigned commissioners whereas Zimbabwe and Botswana still rely on manual systems often inefficiently managed especially when it comes to allocating matters to ADR interventionists.15 In Zimbabwe the challenge of resources is acute often the Labour Officers lacking a simple photocopier and postage stamps to dispense with administration of disputes. This dissertation found that Botswana and Zimbabwe lack publicly available information from which to infer the efficaciousness of ADR practices therein. Measuring client satisfaction, efficiency and cost effectiveness, enforcement and settlement has not been tackled with ease, which was different when it came to RSA. This study argues that RSA’s ADR is efficacious rated at 75% attainment of settlement of disputes, despite accusations of failing to offer disputants options and job retention at the end of ADR intervention. Botswana and Zimbabwe on the measures raised above are not yet close to achieving efficaciousness based on the above criteria. The challenges need to be addressed to ensure that in all three measures ADR affords Botswana, RSA and Zimbabwe disputants a cheaper, efficient and effective alternative to dispensing with labour disputes. This study concluded with recommendations arising from the three measures ADR Background Conditions; ADR Program Design and (3) ADR Measures could be implemented towards achieving an efficacious ADR regime for the three countries and beyond.
Mercantile Law
LL.M.

碩士
逢甲大學
土地管理學系
107
When disputes occur in different stages of a construction project, concerning such items as design planning, construction funding, project alteration, delay penalties, management fees of due date extension, request for deposit-refunds, operational expenses and ratios of profit distribution, the terms and nature of the resolution process can vary. Therefore, different resolutions may result in various outcomes. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of various types of resolutions in a number of construction disputes. This study initially explains dispute resolution procedures and characteristics. Then it uses the legal and regulatory retrieval system of the Judicial Department to identify dispute cases handled through arbitration, and similar dispute cases handled with litigation. As a result, all the information concerning trial duration, legal expenses, and settlement ratios can be sorted and edited. Finally, methods of economic analysis of law are established to provide guidelines in selecting appropriate dispute resolutions based on the various construction stages and types of disagreements. Hopefully, this research can provide resolution references for related construction disputes in the future. Conclusions of this study are as follows: 1. When considering the trial duration of a construction dispute, an arbitration decision generally takes between seven months (the shortest period) and four years and six months (the longest period). However, a court judgment can take between three years and five months (the shortest period) and 12 years or more (the longest period). Therefore, the timeframe for litiga-tion is five to six times longer than arbitration. 2. When figuring out the ratios between the cost of arbitration to a claim and the expense of litigation to a claim, a ratio of 5 to 35‰ is found for arbitration and a ratio of 13 to 42 ‰ is estab-lished for litigation. Therefore, the litigation expenses are about two to three times more than arbitration costs. 3. When comparing the ratios of arbitration settlement to litiga-tion settlement, there is no significant difference between arbi-tration (12 to 98%) and litigation (0 to 100%).

Dissertação de Mestrado em Direito apresentada à Faculdade de Direito
This dissertation analyzes the production of pre-litigation evidence in the scope of Alternative Dispute Resolution - ADR, with special emphasis on Mediation. To systematize the study on the subject, it is necessary to go through the roots and conceptualization of the main institutes created from the ADR. The access to Justice principle is studied as the basis for an enlargement of State Justice provision, including extrajudicial conflit solutions. Subsequently, under the framework of expert evidence, it explores the judicial and extrajudicial pre-litigation procedures already existing in the Civil Law and Commom Law legal systems by means of a comparative study. Finally, the effects of an insertion of a binded pre-litigation evidence production procedure in the current legal systems, and consequently, their impact on the judicialization demands praxis are critically considered.The general objective of the study is to analyze how the production of pre-litigation expert evidence can be able to modify access to justice, encouraging alternative forms of conflict resolution. The specific objectives were developed throughout the work in three chapters. The first one seeks to understand, initially, the historical context of the emergence of alternative / adequate methods of conflict resolution, against the paradigm of the judicialization of demands and the re-reading of access to justice in the current processualistic. The second chapter covered the definition and presentation of expert evidence, based on Portuguese legislation. Subsequently, it was examined how the pre-litigation evidence was considered in the main legislations of the Continental System (Portugal, Brazil, Spain and Italy) and also in English Procedural Law (United Kingdom), by analyzing the procedures of preaction protocols. At this point, the inquisitive and cooperative process models were analyzed, using comparative study techniques. In the last chapter we tried to answer the central question of the work, by analyzing the potential effects of the unjudgmental production of pre-litigation expert evidence. Points markedly present in the alternative dispute settlement culture (out-of-court settlement, access to justice, the principle of self-preservation of the parties' wishes, lack of mediator imperative, and the cost criterion) were assessed.
Analisa-se a produção de prova pericial pré-contenciosa no âmbito dos meios alternativos de resolução de controvérsias (Alternative Dispute Resolution – ADR), dando especial ênfase à Mediação. Para sistematizar o estudo sobre tema, é necessário percorrer as raízes e conceituação dos principais institutos criados a partir da ADR. Estuda-se o princípio do acesso a Justiça como princípio-base para um alargamento da prestação jurisdicional pelo Estado, incluindo-se as soluções de conflitos extrajudiciais. Em seguida investiga-se, no contexto da prova pericial, os procedimentos judiciais e extrajudiciais pré-contenciosos já existentes nos ordenamentos jurídicos do sistema Civil Law e Commom Law, por meio de estudo comparado. Por fim, reflete-se criticamente os efeitos da introdução de um sistema obrigatório de produção de prova pericial pré-contenciosa nos ordenamentos atuais, e consequentemente, seus impactos na modificação da cultura de judicialização de demandas.O objetivo geral do trabalho é analisar de que forma a produção de prova pericial pré-contenciosa pode ser capaz de modificar o acesso à justiça, incentivando formas alternativas de solução de conflitos. Os objetivos específicos foram desenvolvidos ao longo do trabalho em três capítulos. No primeiro busca-se entender, inicialmente, o contexto histórico de surgimento dos métodos alternativos/adequados de solução de conflito, frente ao paradigma da judicialização de demandas e a releitura do acesso à justiça na processualística atual. O segundo capítulo percorreu a definição e apresentação da prova pericial, tendo como base a legislação Portuguesa. Em seguida, passou-se a analisar como a prova pericial de caráter pré-contencioso foi contemplada nas principais legislações do Sistema Continental (Portugal, Brasil, Espanha e Itália) e também no Direito Processual Inglês (Reino Unido), pela análise dos procedimentos de pre action protocols. Nesse ponto foram analisados os modelos inquisitivo e cooperativo de processo, utilizando-se das técnicas de estudo comparado.No último capítulo buscou-se responder à questão central do trabalho, através da análise dos potenciais efeitos da desjudicialização da produção de prova pericial pré-contenciosa. Foram avaliados pontos marcadamente presentes na cultura alternativa de solução de controvérsias (a via extrajudicial, o acesso a justiça, o princípio do autorregramento da vontade das partes, ausência de imperatividade do mediador e o critério de custas).

博士
國立中山大學
中國與亞太區域研究所
99
Due to the planned economy, the labor relations in China had been merely an extension of the administrative relations for long. Led by collectivism, collective labor relations based on individual interests actually did not exist in China. In fact, the labor relations, aimed to protect individual labor interests, turned out to be a complex of labor interests, trade unions, and the administration. Although the factors such as labor interests, trade unions, and governmental regulations could be found in China’s labor market, the causes of them were quite different from those in western countries. Accordingly, the conceptions derived from Taiwan or other developed countries couldn’t be entirely applied when we analyzed the labor relations in China. The transition of the legal system of labor relations in modern China can be grouped under the two categories: preventive regulations and remedy measures. The former contains the implementation of labor standards, the enforcement of collective labor contracts, and the administration of labor contract system while the latter covers labor supervision and labor disputes resolution regulations. During the establishment of China labor laws, the regulations of the labor dispute resolutions tend to correspond with labor condition rules. Different from the policies of dealing labor disputes in western countries, the labor dispute regulations in China strictly follow the three stages: mediation, arbitration, and litigation. In such an inflexible procedure, the clients have no freedom to choose preferred methods or measures. Most of all, since labor litigation is the final stage of the procedure, the judicial interpretation of the supreme civil court has a great impact on the results of labors’ relief-seeking. In other words, it plays a crucial role in the field of labor dispute resolutions. To have a full understanding of the labor dispute resolution system in China, the research begins with labor litigation and systematically examines the relations between arbitration and judicial review.