Dispute Resolution: Settlement Out of Court Option and ADR Issues

This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of settlement out of court option and ADR issues in dispute resolution. It also highlights the legal issues that may not benefit from ADR in resolution.

Running head: DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Dispute Resolution
Name:
Academic Institution:
Date:

DISPUTE RESOLUTION 2
Settlement Out of Court Option
A settlement is a word that is used for prescribed or formal resolution of a legal dispute
without taking the issue to be determined by the court. It comes after an agreement between the
parties involved in a case. The defendant provides a particular amount of money to the plaintiff
in give-and-take for the plaintiff’s signing a release of the liability of the defendant about the
major occurrence or transaction for that matter (Faure & Weber, 2016). It takes place at any stage
in a civil litigation process.
Settlement out of court can have a good or bad outcome in favor of either the defendant
or the plaintiff. In addition to the expectancy of the unknown and unpredictable outcome to be
received at the trial, both parties of litigation might fear to get on the eyewitness stand and
narrating their side of the story to the jury, then being subject to interrogation by the other side of
the counsel. In general, having a case settled out of court has several advantages as explained in
the paragraphs below.
Court cases are costly especially if the trial goes on for several months or even years, the
expenses can be overwhelming. It doesn’t matter who wins the case, court charges and
compensation for the attorneys can chip away at the payments. One of the fundamental benefits
for plaintiffs who select to settle outside of court is the more reasonable expense (Gutman,
2017). A reasonable attorney can ordinarily reach a precise acceptable agreement or settlement in
far less duration than it would take to argue the case in the court.
On the other hand, settlement may lessen the stress that can be caused by trial through
interrogation and the anticipation of the outcome. Similarly, privacy is essential in very many

DISPUTE RESOLUTION 3
situations; therefore, if a case is taken to court, the level of privacy is reduced as both defendant,
and the plaintiff are brought to the public during the proceedings.
ADR Issues
ADR is a term that is applied for various ways of dispute resolution. These include
mediation, adjudication, arbitration, and ombudsmen. It is important to know who is making a
claim and why, that is very critical when thinking about the claims made for any dispute since
some of them might be true, but again only in some circumstances. Several legal issues might not
benefit from the ADR in resolution. For example, the arbitration decisions are final and cannot
be appealed, injunctions cannot be issued, and finally, arbitrators can only resolve a dispute
involving financial issues (Duplessis O’Byrne, King, Adams & Enman, 2016).
ADR as discussed above has several advantages compared to disadvantages; however, I
don’t believe it is a good trend since one party can influence the decision of the arbitrator who
again issues the verdict in favor of one party. Similarly, it cannot solve some technical issues that
need legal interpretations from the judges (Nabatchi, 2007). Once the settlements are done, the
courts are always reluctant thinking re-opening of the settlement agreement could result to same
claims and therefore it is of no use.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION 4
References
Duplessis, D., O’Byrne, S., King, P., Adams, L. and Enman, S. (2016). CANADIAN BUSINESS
AND THE LAW. 6th ed. Ontario, pp.67-91
Faure, M., & Weber, F. (2016). Potential and Limits of Out-Of-Court Rapid Claims Settlement--
A Law and Economics Analysis. Journal of Environmental Law, 28(1), 125–150.
Gutman, J. (2017). Mediation and Its Uses in the Legal Process. Legaldate, 29(2), 3–7
Nabatchi, T. (2007). The Institutionalization of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal
Government. Public Administration Review, 67(4), 646–661.