home / study / business / operations management / questions and answers / becaus

Question

home / study / business / operations management / questions and answers / because arbitrators are selected by a negotiation ... Your question needs more information to be answered. A Chegg Expert needs more info to provide you with the best answer. See comments below. Question Because arbitrators are selected by a negotiation between the two parties in the arbitration, this story indicates they are more likely to find for these repeat players. Discuss the ethics of this conflict of interest and what might be done to overcome the problem http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/streaming/bp/2013/business_law/BLaw2013_Jud_Alt.html

Explanation / Answer

Arbitration vs. Litigation process

            In accordance to, Protection, (2012), sometimes one may have encountered an arbitration clause in the case of California Republic consumer loose against their credit cards contractors. The credit cards company in California has shown manipulation of private formalities in settling disputes with their customers. The question that arises is how comes 99% of the cases between the credit cards, and consumers are in justified for the credit cards companies? This study shows that arbitration process can be manipulated and not justified although sometimes considered.

The significant difference between the two means of passing justice is that for the arbitration is a private, between the two parties and informal while litigation is a formal process conducted in a public courtroom. In accessing the process, Gough, et.al,(2014), explains arbitration is relatively quick, and cost process is also small compared to the litigation process. But they miss some steps which are essential in determining the case. For instance in civil litigation, attorneys spend much time gathering, making a motion and presenting their cases, unlike the arbitration which their role is limited.

Also, litigation process although long and costly their rule seems to be fair because they are formally recognized, and rules of evidence are allowed unlike the limited process in arbitration. On the other hand, the court appoints judges which the parties have limited inputs into but for the arbitration, the process parties select arbitrator which at most cases they can be manipulated to rule on one side.

If arbitration fails and individuals chose to go to the courts, ADR technique is used. The method provides parties with an opportunity to try their case before the advisory panel, without having to face the final and possibly adverse decisions of a rational jury in civil court. Like minitrials, they give the parties a chance to reach a preliminary assessment of the strength and weakness of their position and proceed with negotiations from a standard starting point.

The jury trial is presided over by judges often presented to council for consideration. Provided with little character profile and two challenges the proceeding arrive at a final board of six members. Each judge is given one hour to describe his client case to the panel. After the presentation, the president of the tribunal delivers a statement applicable to the law and retires to deliberate. After the verdict, the counsel meets with the president of the tribunal to establish the timetable for settlement negotiation.

References

Colvin, A., & Gough, M. D. (2014). Comparing Mandatory Arbitration and Litigation: Access, Process, and Outcomes.

Protection, C. (2012). Diagnostic Review of Consumer Protection and Financial Literacy.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse H
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.