# data[].attributes.headline
Advantages of Tribunals.

                                                                                                          1)      A
person or institute which has authority to judge or adjudicate a dispute. It’s
also classifies as a non-departmental public body. ‘ Bodies outside the hierarchy
of courts with administrative and judicial function”-                                                                             

2)      –Relief
congestion in ordinary courts 
- Speedier and cheaper
procedures
- Have specific
issues dealt with by persons with an intimate knowledge and experience of a
particular problem 

-         
The
need to provide a specialist forum to deal with cases involving conflicts
between increasing welfare state and citizens                                    3)      Types
of Tribunals – Domestic and Administrative                                                 

4)      These are often used within the professions
to determine questions relating to the professional conduct of their members.
This usually involves matters of discipline.

Examples of domestic tribunals include the General Medical Council
(GMC), the General Dental Council (GNC), the Bar Council and other related
bodies.                                      Since Lee v Showmen’s Guild of Great Britain (1952) the courts
will interfere in any domestic tribunal to ensure that the rules of these
associations are correctly interpreted and the principles of natural justice
are observed.
Lee was a man who sold
pots and pans in a public market. The Showmen’s Guild was a merchants’
organization of which Lee was a member. Lee had a dispute with a fellow
merchant in the market and the Guild punished him by suspending his membership.
Lee fought his suspension in court and won.                                                                                                                                                 The judge’s decision established two critical principles :                                                        ¤   the jurisdiction of a domestic tribunal is
founded on a contract, and                             ¤   a domestic tribunal is subject to the rules of natural justice.

                                      5)      These are concerned with administrative
law or matters affecting the rights of a large numbers of persons. 

A large number of administrative tribunals have been set up by
various statutes. However, there are some tribunals which rarely ever sit
and a few that have never sat.                                                                                                                          Examples-Employment Tribunals

-Asylum & Immigration Tribunal                            Tribunal Composition
Most tribunals consist of a
legally-qualified chair person with two independent members (with
relevant expertise), one representing each side of the dispute. 

The independent members often can
bring expertise to the decision of the tribunal. 

¨  For instance, the Employment
Tribunal consists of a legally-qualified chairperson, a person who has worked
as an employer and a person who has worked as a trade unionist.
Appeal from many tribunals is to
the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench. For some, such as the Lands
Tribunal, appeal lies to the Court of Appeal

¨  However, some tribunals have their own special appeal tribunal. For
instance, an appeal from an Employment
Tribunal is to the Employment Appeal Tribunal;

¨                    ADVANTAGES
Cost (to parties)                                                                                                   ¤  Tribunals usually do not charge fees, each party usually pays their own
costs. The simpler procedures of
tribunals should mean that legal representation is unnecessary, so reducing
costs.

¨                                                                                                                       Speed

¤  Cases come to the tribunal fairly
quickly, many are dealt with within a day

¨  Informality

¤  Varies between different tribunals, as a general rule, wigs are not
worn, strict rules of evidence do not apply, and attempts are made to create an un-intimidating atmosphere.

¨                                                                                                                            Flexibility

¤  Although they aim to apply fairly consistent principles, tribunals do not operate strict rules of
precedent, so are able to respond more flexibly than courts

¨  Privacy

¤  Tribunals may, in some circumstances, meet in private, so that the individual is not obliged to have
their problems aired in public

¨                                                       Expertise

¤  Tribunals members already have expertise
in the relevant subject area and through sitting on tribunals are able
to build up a depth of knowledge of
that area that judges in ordinary courts could not hope to match

¨                                                           Relief of pressure on Courts

¤  If the volume of cases heard
by tribunals was transferred to the ordinary courts, the system would be
completely overloaded. 

 

# data[].attributes.subject
Advantages of Tribunals.

                                                                                                          1)      A
person or institute which has authority to judge or adjudicate a dispute. It’s
also classifies as a non-departmental public body. ‘ Bodies outside the hierarchy
of courts with administrative and judicial function”-                                                                             

2)      –Relief
congestion in ordinary courts 
- Speedier and cheaper
procedures
- Have specific
issues dealt with by persons with an intimate knowledge and experience of a
particular problem 

-         
The
need to provide a specialist forum to deal with cases involving conflicts
between increasing welfare state and citizens                                    3)      Types
of Tribunals – Domestic and Administrative                                                 

4)      These are often used within the professions
to determine questions relating to the professional conduct of their members.
This usually involves matters of discipline.

Examples of domestic tribunals include the General Medical Council
(GMC), the General Dental Council (GNC), the Bar Council and other related
bodies.                                      Since Lee v Showmen’s Guild of Great Britain (1952) the courts
will interfere in any domestic tribunal to ensure that the rules of these
associations are correctly interpreted and the principles of natural justice
are observed.
Lee was a man who sold
pots and pans in a public market. The Showmen’s Guild was a merchants’
organization of which Lee was a member. Lee had a dispute with a fellow
merchant in the market and the Guild punished him by suspending his membership.
Lee fought his suspension in court and won.                                                                                                                                                 The judge’s decision established two critical principles :                                                        ¤   the jurisdiction of a domestic tribunal is
founded on a contract, and                             ¤   a domestic tribunal is subject to the rules of natural justice.

                                      5)      These are concerned with administrative
law or matters affecting the rights of a large numbers of persons. 

A large number of administrative tribunals have been set up by
various statutes. However, there are some tribunals which rarely ever sit
and a few that have never sat.                                                                                                                          Examples-Employment Tribunals

-Asylum & Immigration Tribunal                            Tribunal Composition
Most tribunals consist of a
legally-qualified chair person with two independent members (with
relevant expertise), one representing each side of the dispute. 

The independent members often can
bring expertise to the decision of the tribunal. 

¨  For instance, the Employment
Tribunal consists of a legally-qualified chairperson, a person who has worked
as an employer and a person who has worked as a trade unionist.
Appeal from many tribunals is to
the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench. For some, such as the Lands
Tribunal, appeal lies to the Court of Appeal

¨  However, some tribunals have their own special appeal tribunal. For
instance, an appeal from an Employment
Tribunal is to the Employment Appeal Tribunal;

¨                    ADVANTAGES
Cost (to parties)                                                                                                   ¤  Tribunals usually do not charge fees, each party usually pays their own
costs. The simpler procedures of
tribunals should mean that legal representation is unnecessary, so reducing
costs.

¨                                                                                                                       Speed

¤  Cases come to the tribunal fairly
quickly, many are dealt with within a day

¨  Informality

¤  Varies between different tribunals, as a general rule, wigs are not
worn, strict rules of evidence do not apply, and attempts are made to create an un-intimidating atmosphere.

¨                                                                                                                            Flexibility

¤  Although they aim to apply fairly consistent principles, tribunals do not operate strict rules of
precedent, so are able to respond more flexibly than courts

¨  Privacy

¤  Tribunals may, in some circumstances, meet in private, so that the individual is not obliged to have
their problems aired in public

¨                                                       Expertise

¤  Tribunals members already have expertise
in the relevant subject area and through sitting on tribunals are able
to build up a depth of knowledge of
that area that judges in ordinary courts could not hope to match

¨                                                           Relief of pressure on Courts

¤  If the volume of cases heard
by tribunals was transferred to the ordinary courts, the system would be
completely overloaded. 

 

# data[].attributes.body
ADR

What is ADR ? It represents any number of techniques and processes utilized by parties in dispute that allow for agreements and settlement outside of the litigation process with the help of an independent third party and without the need for a formal court hearing.

And ADR offers many types of means in solving disputes, which is mediation, concilation, arbitration as well as through the tribunals.

For mediation, parties in a dispute may refer their dispute to an independent third party who will act as a go-between. The mediator will help the parties discuss their dispute in order to try to settle it. If parties in litigation refuse an offer to mediate without good reason then even if they win their case in court, the judge can refuse to award them some or all of their legal costs. This can be illustrated in the case of

Dunnett v Railtrack and Cowl V Plymouth City Council 2002, where the Court of Appeal controversially ordered that the successful party in negligence litigation should pay the losing side’s costs – because of the former’s  failure to respond positively to the court’s  suggestion that they should enter into mediation. This was despite the fact that the defendant had already won in the county court – this led to massive increase in the profile of ADR in general and mediation in particular.

Mediaton primarily resolves matrimonial disputes, as its informality and privacy is ideally suited to such disputes. It also resovles Commercial , defamation, employment and housing disputes

Arbitration: adjudication of dispute by one or more specially appointed lawyers.

-can be used for most types of disputes (employment disputes, consumer disputes, international disputes).

-Advantages: parties can choose their own arbitrator, parties are able to assure on confidentiality of their cases (privacy), faster and cheaper.

-Disadvantages: fees may be higher for professional arbitrators, rights of appeal limited.

Advantages: its quick and cost effective, parties retain control of their dispute, lack of adversarial procedure helps parties’ preserve existing relationship and it is confidential

Disadvantages: legal aid is not provided, lack of legal expertise, imbalance of power and no system of precedent

Tribunals is also one of the alternatives that the citizens can go for.

Tribunals were created to give people a method of enforcing their entitlement to certain social rights.

However, unlike ADR, where the parties decide not to use the courts, the parties in tribunal cases cannot go to court to resolve their dispute.

Advantages of tribunals:

Speed : Fast, can be dealt within a day

Cost :Tribunals usually do not charge fees, each party usually pays their own costs.

The simpler procedures - legal representation is unnecessary, reducing costs.

Informality: strict rules of evidence do not apply

Flexibility: tribunals do not operate strict rules of precedent, more flexible than courts

Privacy: met in private, so that the individual is not obliged to have their problems aired in public

Expertise: Tribunals members are experts in the relevant subject area. And also their knowledge of the subject area can further build up as time goes by.

Relief of pressure on Courts: Avoiding floodgates: If the volume of cases heard by tribunals was transferred to the ordinary courts, the system would be completely overloaded.

DIsadvantages of courts

The problem of floodgates. The court could not cope with all disputes needing formal resolution.

To file a claim in court, a writ is needed which could be redundant in minor disputes.

Also, if u bring a dispute to a lower court where the doctrine of precedent is strictly followed, there could be rigid and cause inflexibility and justice cannot be obtained.

Costly

Not private, anyone, even strangers can know what’s going on

takes very long, delays are well-known in courts

Parties are unable to compromise within each other, instead the court is the one who decides on the outcome.

A clear loser and winner, the relationship between the parties might turn bad after a trial

Therefore, with the advantages of ADR and the disadvantages of the courts, while it still depends on the parties’ situations, generally, it can be said that the courts do not offer the best means to resolve disputes, especially when it comes to civil cases.

# data[].attributes.headline
1.    
What
is ADR? Explore the reasons for its rise in popularity.

# data[].attributes.subject
1.    
What
is ADR? Explore the reasons for its rise in popularity.

# data[].attributes.body
ADR in a civil law context, represents any number of techniques and processes utilized by parties in dispute that allow for agreements and settlement outside of the litigation process with the help of an independent third party and without the need for a formal court hearing.

Types of ADR:

i.         Tribunals

ii.         Arbitration

iii.         Mediation

iv.         Ombudsman

v.         Conciliation

vi.         Negotiation

Adv. ADR

1. Its Quick And Cost Effective

2. Parties Retain Control Of Their Dispute

3. Informality & Lack Of Adversarial Procedure Helps Parties’ Preserve Existing Relationship

4. It is Confidential

5. Flexibility

6. No burden of proof

.

DisAdv. Of courts

cost - expensive and sometimes disproportionate

delay - litigation is lengthy and time-consuming

formality  - procedure can be intimidating

adversarial nature may be undesirable - e.g. family disputes

Incapacity - court system could not cope with all disputes needing formal resolution

Publicity

-       Court hearings are public, as such there will be no privacy as the case may reveal their personal detailed information

·      Lord woolf reform

-       Lord woolf concluded that the then present system of civil justice was too slow, too expansive, too complex and too inaccessible

DisAdv. Of ADR

i.         Rights of appeal are limited, as the parties agree that they will consider the arbitrators decision to be binding

ii.         No legal aid

iii.         Lack of precedent unlike the civil court system

iv.         Mediators may exceed their role, eg mediators may take control of the discussion

v.         Parties without legal representatives are disadvantaged against parties who are legally represented

Conclusion:

Court can be categorised as one of the way to settle dispute. However, we think that it is not the best way as there are still many other options for example of ADR

# data[].attributes.headline
Discuss the role of Tribunals in dispute resolution. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Discuss the role of Tribunals in dispute resolution. 

# data[].attributes.body
1. Tribunals are part of the national system of administrative justice but are classed as non-departmental public bodies. The judicial functions of tribunals are provided by statute and serves as an alternative to courts for many reasons.

2. Given that it sees over 1 million cases in a year, tribunals relief congestion in ordinary courts. Tribunals are led by individuals with specialist knowledge hence why each tribunal focuses on a small number of issues  including Employment Tribunals, Administrative Tribunals,  Asylum and Immigration Tribunals and Pension Appeals Tribunals.

3. Tribunals provide a cheaper and simpler alternative to the people since it does not charge fees, each party pays for their own costs and losers don’t have to compensate for the costs incurred.

4. It’s simpler since it is much more informal i.e. chairs don’t use wigs, no strict evidence rules and there are active attempts to create a less intimidating atmospheres what more that individuals can represent themselves since procedures are easy to understand.

5. Most tribunals also deal with cases within a day and are able to specify the exact date and time if it can’t resolve in a day.

6. Finally, tribunals protect the privacy of individuals especially cases sensitive to the parties in that there is no presence of the public and broadcasting media.

7. Role of tribunals better improved with Franks Committee Report (1957). Now all tribunal hearings are required to provide reasons for the decisions given out with all material facts disclosed to all parties before the hearing.

8. Tribunals are free from undue influence from any government departments which means an increases in cases involving state and citizens concerning welfare.

9. Following Legatt Review of Tribunals (2001), all tribunals consists of one legally trained chairperson and two lay people with expert knowledge.

10. Clear progression of appeal, can be raised on a point of law with permission from First-Tier to the upper Tribunal, from Upper Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. Conclusion, Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council keep the tribunal and administrative justice system under review as established in the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.