Court System and Alternative Dispute Resolution
Courts and their mechanisms exist to preserve fundamental human rights and freedoms. Conflicts and disagreements are inevitable in life, and it’s up to the courts to resolve them, whether it’s a breach of contract, a landlord-tenant conflict, or a claim of medical or legal malpractice. They pay attention to stakeholders and endeavor to achieve a fair and equitable conclusion based on the facts and the law (Marciano et al., 2019). Judges and courts have a strong impact on a person’s life and are tasked with making vital rulings that affect them. Only a court, for example, may grant a divorce, send someone to prison, or amend the property rights (Marciano et al., 2019). Essentially, the courts can be described as problem solvers. In general, courts and judges must dispense justice without fear or favor; they must be fair, just, and unbiased.
There are several advantages within the dual court system. Every person, for example, has access to many judicial systems. The dual trial system gives people more options when it comes to seeking help. If a topic or issue is not being addressed in one place, it may be brought up in another, resulting in a plethora of possibilities for voices of concern to be heard across the country (Zambrano, 2019). There is a belief that a unified legal system will not be able to perform all of its primary responsibilities. Within them, parallel courts intervene and provide choices for resolving conflicts.
Over the last decade, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has grown in popularity. This method of dispute resolution includes a number of pros and cons. They may be less expensive and faster than other methods of resolution (Menkel-Meadow, 2018). Moreover, they also provide a privacy maneuver as well as some flexibility. Because of these advantages, there are more possibilities to maintain professional connections even within escalations (Menkel-Meadow, 2018). The cons are mainly that there is no assurance of a solution that can be employed as a time-consuming technique. Furthermore, ADR is unlikely to tackle a multidimensional problem.
References
Marciano, A., Melcarne, A., & Ramello, G. B. (2019). The economic importance of judicial institutions, their performance, and the proper way to measure them. Journal of Institutional Economics, 15(1), 81-98.
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2018). Ethics in alternative dispute resolution: New issues, no answers from the adversary conception of lawyers’ responsibilities. Routledge.
Zambrano, D. A. (2019). Federal Expansion and the Decay of State Courts. The University of Chicago Law Review, 86(8), 2101-2192.