THE COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION VIA COURT PROCESS AND ARBITRATION
ABSTRACT
This research focuses on “The Comparative Evaluation of Dispute Resolution Via Court Process and Arbitration,” conducted in Lagos State with a sample size of 400 respondents, aimed to explore and understand prevailing opinions and preferences regarding dispute resolution mechanisms. Survey research design was adopted for the study. Data was collected from 400 randomly selected respondents using self-administered structured questionnaire. Data collected were analysed, using descriptive statistics. The findings highlight a resounding preference for arbitration over traditional court processes among the respondents. A significant majority expressed the view that arbitration is more efficient and expeditious, believing that litigation often causes delays in the administration of justice. Furthermore, respondents perceived arbitration as a powerful tool for promoting lasting peace and reconciliation, emphasizing its relevance in peace-building, peacemaking, and peacekeeping at a national level. The study also unveiled a belief in arbitration’s innovative approach to conflict resolution, indicating its potential as a consequential innovation in the management of peace and conflict. While a minority favored traditional litigation, the overall findings underscore the importance of promoting arbitration as a swift, peaceful, and innovative alternative while ensuring continued access to the court process for those who prefer it. These insights contribute to the ongoing discourse on dispute resolution mechanisms, advocating for a balanced and responsive approach to meet the diverse needs of parties involved.
THE COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION VIA COURT PROCESS AND ARBITRATION
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Dispute resolution is an integral part of any legal system, providing a mechanism for resolving conflicts and disputes that arise between parties. In many jurisdictions, the court process has long been the traditional and default method for resolving disputes. Under the court process, parties present their case before a judge or jury, who listens to the arguments, reviews evidence, and ultimately makes a binding decision (Alaoul et al., 2019). However, court processes is often associated with certain drawbacks that have led to the exploration and adoption of alternative dispute resolution methods. These drawbacks include the lengthy duration of court proceedings, high costs involved, lack of control over the process, and the adversarial nature of litigation, which can strain relationships between parties (Bendeman, 2006).
One prominent alternative to the court process is arbitration. Arbitration is a private form of dispute resolution where the parties agree to submit their dispute to one or more arbitrators who act as an independent tribunal. The arbitrators, typically chosen for their expertise in the subject matter of the dispute, hear the arguments, review evidence, and render a binding decision known as an arbitral award (Mutil, 1989; Stipanowich, 2004). Arbitration offers several potential advantages over the court process, such as flexibility in procedure, faster resolution, expertise of decision-makers, confidentiality, and potentially reduced costs.
The growing popularity of arbitration as an alternative to litigation has led to a need for a comparative evaluation of these two dispute resolution mechanisms. Such an evaluation can help parties, legal practitioners, and policymakers make informed decisions regarding the most suitable method for resolving their disputes. By examining and comparing factors such as efficiency, cost, enforceability, confidentiality, and expertise of decision-makers, this research aims to shed light on the relative strengths and weaknesses of the court process and arbitration.
It is important to note that the suitability of the court process or arbitration may vary depending on the nature of the dispute, the preferences of the parties involved, and the legal framework of the jurisdiction in question. Therefore, conducting a comparative evaluation can assist in understanding the circumstances under which one method may be more advantageous than the other.
By undertaking this research, a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of both the court process and arbitration can be achieved. This understanding can contribute to the development of more effective dispute-resolution strategies, the improvement of existing legal frameworks, and the promotion of access to justice for individuals and organizations involved in disputes.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The choice between the court process and arbitration as dispute resolution mechanisms presents various advantages and disadvantages that impact parties involved in a conflict. The court process, while offering advantages such as a structured legal framework, compulsory participation, and thorough evidence review, also presents drawbacks. These include high costs due to legal fees, lengthy proceedings, technical legal procedures, and the demand for substantial evidence (Bendeman, 2006). The complexity of court procedures can lead to delays, increased expenses, and limited accessibility for those without legal representation. Moreover, the expenses associated with court proceedings, including legal and court fees, can be prohibitive, hindering access to justice. Parties engaging in court proceedings must provide significant evidence to support their claims, which can be burdensome and contribute to extended timelines and escalated costs (Bernstein, 1992).
Arbitration, as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, offers potential solutions to some of the problems associated with the court process. It provides flexibility in procedure, allowing parties to tailor the process to their specific needs. Arbitration can be faster and more cost-effective than litigation, as it avoids some of the formalities and delays associated with court proceedings. Additionally, arbitration allows parties to choose arbitrators with expertise in the subject matter of the dispute, potentially leading to more informed and specialized decision-making (Moza and Paul, 2017).
While arbitration presents advantages, it also introduces new challenges. These may include the potential lack of judicial oversight, limited rights to appeal, higher costs compared to certain court processes, and the potential for a less extensive review of evidence. Confidentiality, which is often valued in arbitration, may also limit transparency and public accountability.
This research aims to address the identified problems by conducting a comparative evaluation of dispute resolution via the court process and arbitration. By identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each mechanism, this research intends to provide recommendations for effective dispute resolution that consider the advantages of the court process, address its disadvantages, and explore the benefits and challenges associated with arbitration.
1.3 Research Questions
The following research questions were raised to guide the Study
- What are the major characteristics and procedural aspects of the court process as a method of resolving disputes?
- What are the distinctive characteristics and procedural elements of arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism?
- How does the efficiency of the court process compare to arbitration in terms of resolving disputes?
- Based on a comparative evaluation of the court process and arbitration, what recommendations can be made to enhance the effectiveness of dispute resolution mechanisms?
1.4 Research Objectives
The general objective of the study is to carry out a Comparative Evaluation of Dispute Resolution Via Court Process and Arbitration
The specific objectives of this research are as follows:
- To examine the characteristics and procedures of the court process as a dispute resolution mechanism.
- To explore the characteristics and procedures of arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism.
- To compare the efficiency of the court process and arbitration in resolving disputes.
- To provide recommendations based on the comparative evaluation of the court process and arbitration for effective dispute resolution.
1.5 Significance of the Study
This research holds significant importance for various stakeholders involved in dispute resolution. For parties involved in a conflict, understanding the pros and cons of the court process and arbitration can help them make an informed decision on the most suitable method for resolving their dispute. Legal practitioners can benefit from a comparative evaluation of these mechanisms, as it can guide them in advising their clients on the most appropriate approach. Additionally, policymakers and lawmakers can utilize the findings of this study to improve existing dispute resolution frameworks and promote access to justice.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The scope of this research is focused on the comparative evaluation of dispute resolution via the court process and arbitration. It will primarily examine the characteristics, procedures, efficiency, cost implications, enforceability, confidentiality, and expertise of decision-makers in these two methods. However, it is important to note that the research does not cover other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms such as mediation or negotiation. Furthermore, the study is limited to the evaluation of court processes and arbitration within a specific jurisdiction and may not encompass all the variations and practices that exist globally.
THE COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION VIA COURT PROCESS AND ARBITRATION. GET MORE LAW PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS