¿Cómo se puede utilizar el arbitraje para resolver conflictos?

Arbitration comes from the latin word 'arbiter' which means “eyewitness, onlooker, person appointed to settle a dispute.” It is related to 'jus' which is another word for "law" and from which judge, justice and related terms come from. Yet arbiter is different in that it is more broader encompassing beyond just law, this can be hinted by another sister word originating from the same latin root "arbitrary". An arbitrator is thus someone even more empowered then a judge who bears witness to the dispute to determine by his/her will what is the right ruling and not necessarily confined by law. We do have a taming of arbitration in the rules developed around it. Arbitration is a very powerful ADR tool that is often not reflected upon by many.

1. **Agreement:** Both parties must agree to arbitration, usually outlined in a contract or agreement before a dispute arises. 2. **Selection of Arbitrator:** The involved parties choose a neutral arbitrator or a panel, often with expertise in the relevant field. 3. **Arbitration Process:** Each party presents their case, evidence, and witnesses to the arbitrator. The process is less formal than a court trial. 4. **Decision:** The arbitrator issues a binding decision, called an award, which resolves the dispute. Parties typically agree in advance to abide by this decision. 5. **Enforcement:** The award can be enforced through legal channels if necessary, providing a level of finality to the resolution.

Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution method where parties agree to have an impartial third-party arbitrator make a final, binding decision to settle their dispute. Although it depends upon the matter but here are the key steps are: 1.Agreement to arbitrate 2.Selection of the arbitrator(s) 3.Presentation of evidence and arguments 4.Arbitrator's binding decision The main benefits of arbitration are confidentiality, flexibility, expert decision-makers, and efficiency compared to traditional litigation. Arbitration is a widely recognized and authentic way to resolve conflicts.

Arbitrator shall be expert in the work in dispute who can understand dispute easily and assess the same . He should be impartial and not have any relation with parties in dispute

To me arbitration can be a great way to resolve conflicts by agreeing with the other party to submit our dispute to a neutral third party, the arbitrator, who will listen to both sides, consider evidence, and make a binding decision that we commit to accepting. The advantages of arbitration include efficiency, flexibility, expertise of arbitrators, confidentiality, cost-effectiveness, finality, informality, and global recognition.

Advantages: 1. Select the decision maker best suited to hear the dispute 2. Practice and Procedure: create your own bespoke procedure that fits the fuss: 3. Timetabling: Run your own timetable rather than waiting months to schedule a court hearing 4. Expense: YES: Arbitration can be less expensive than civil litigation if it is done right. 5. Confidentiality Disadvantages: 1. If litigants fail to work cooperatively with the arbitrator to create a bespoke process, arbitration can be an expensive clone of the civil justice system. 2. Confidentiality robs us of the "law speak" we read in the law reports and in the press. Law, arguably, should be a public conversation. 3. There are certain kinds of disputes ill suited to arbitration.

Arbitration can often be used over litigation for the reasons including cost saving and time saving mechanism. It can also provide the specialisation and expertise of an arbitrator in order to provide an effective communication between parties.

Arbitration is chosen for various reasons, including confidentiality, speedier resolution, flexibility in procedure, and the ability to select arbitrators with expertise in the specific subject matter. It can be more cost-effective and less formal than traditional litigation, providing parties with a more tailored and efficient dispute resolution process.

Arbitration Clause: If parties are entering into a contract, include an arbitration clause specifying the process, rules, and the appointment of arbitrators in case a dispute arises. This helps streamline the arbitration process when needed. Define the Scope of Arbitration: Clearly outline the issues and claims that will be addressed through arbitration. This ensures that both parties have a shared understanding of the matters being resolved. Pre-Arbitration Discussions: Encourage open communication between the parties before the formal arbitration process begins. This may involve attempts to negotiate or mediate informally to identify common ground and potentially settle the dispute.

In arbitration parties knows about an ability, expertise and technical knowledge of an arbitrator which they choose for dispute resolution. In courts sometimes due to lack of expertise and technical knowledge of a Judge party looses good case. Therefore prudent person always prefer to have an arbitration.

Preparation of arbitration is not similar to conventional court cases. In arbitration proceedings one cannot take advantage of technical knock outs. One must be fair and put the reasonable claim strictly in line with terms and conditions of a binding contracts. The claim must be a bona-fide, authentic and easily able to prove before the arbitrator.

When arguing your case and response to the other parties statement or brief be sure to argue each of their points. Each point unrebuted is taken as undisputed and taken as fact. Be sure to cite the contract, administrative rules, policies, and procedures, ordinances, and laws pertaining to your argument.

In arbitration one must keep the proceedings stressless. Arbitrator is more focused on finding the truth. Help him to come to correct conclusion and based your claim on clear evidence. Avoid, unnecessary and frivolous allegations that might damage your case. Be humble and polite to arbitratoran counsel of other party. Totally focus on merit of your claim.

Here are some tips if you are the lawyer acting for a client in arbitration: a) make full use of the pre-hearing conference process with the arbitrator; b) consider "bifurcating" gateway issues. For example, have a hearing on liability first and deal with damages later if necessary c) do NOT bring motions before the arbitrator as you in civil court: do the motion viva voce. This will save time and money. d) Allegation-based pleadings are a waste of time and money: create and treat Scott/ Redfern Schedules as your pleadings. Concentrate on the evidence not boiler plate allegations

Respectfully make sure your demands are heard. This is your argument to assert. Be assertive. Remove emotion and state your facts with the regard they will as facts command. Judges and arbiters are people too. If you can, do your research and fashion your argument to thier liberal or conservative taste.

The major challenge is that the decision of arbitrator is final and there is a very limited scope to challenge the arbitral award in a court of law. On the other hand, if one has competently proceeded with claim he remained satisfy with the decision as he gets decision early as compare to litigation in which he dragged himself for long time in courts. In less time with less stress he gets the result.

I am puzzled and dismayed by the failure of the bar to embrace domestic arbitration as a meaningful alternative to the civil justice system. In my experience, clients want: to be heard; a timely end to the dispute; be treated fairly; to keep costs down. Arbitration if done right can deliver on all fronts. I suspect that lawyers worry about telling clients about a process that they may be unfamiliar with and telling them that they bear the cost of the arbitrator. Given the delays and administrative mayhem in the court system, a lawyer owes a DUTY to a client to explain both mediation and arbitration as a means of early and efficient dispute resolution.

Arbitration is a method of resolving conflicts 1. Both parties must agree to arbitration, either through a pre-existing contract or by entering into an arbitration agreement after a dispute arises. 2. It's crucial to select arbitrators who are knowledgeable about the subject matter of the dispute and are impartial. 3. The arbitration process typically involves hearings where both parties present evidence, witnesses, and arguments. 4. The arbitrator's decision, known as an award, is legally binding on both parties. 5. Arbitration proceedings are generally private and confidential, to keep their dispute out of the public eye. 6. Both parties are obligated to comply ,as it carries the same legal weight as a court judgment.

Three things. First, read the fine print. Some contracts require arbitration. Law and custom may, too. It’s supposed to be good, fast, and cheap simultaneously. Yeah, right! People litigate arbitrability and contest awards. Arbitration is an adversarial process. Second, some international arbitration is enforceable under UNCITRAL’s New York Convention. That’s a good thing. Unfortunately, collecting judgments is always an issue. Third, some international commercial-dispute settlements resulting from mediation are enforceable under UNCITRAL’s Singapore Convention. That’s a good thing. Don’t underestimate mediation. It can help maintain business relationships. Mediation is not supposed to be an adversarial process. Parties consent. Get it?

1. The arbitration proceedings and award must be based on data and documented evidence. 2. Both parties must choose arbitrators who is/are independent and should not have any conflict of interest. 3. Arbitrator(s) need not be subject matter expert but must have good sense of Judgement & perspective and should know the rules and terms. Sometimes a person(s) without subject matter expertise could be impartial without letting his / her expertise get in the way of decision making.

Lower cost, reduced anxiety, faster results using experts who don't have to be trained as to what the evidence means. It only makes sense. But, as Julie MacFarlane puts it. "process as justice" prevails. It has become more about grinding the evidence to an unrecognizable powder than it has about a reasonable and appropriate result. Genge Construction Adjudications is right there with you Gary.