Models of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): A report for the Legal Ombudsman
The aim of this research was to investigate what the Legal Ombudsman can learn from other Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) providers. The research was commissioned by the Legal Ombudsman to help it review and develop its dispute resolution model and ensure it remains fit-for-purpose. The research involved a case study design and fieldwork was conducted with ten organisations: four in the UK, one in Ireland, two in New Zealand, one in Australia, one in Canada and one in the USA. The research highlighted a range of dispute resolution practices and illustrated some of the key design choices that ADR providers need to make when designing or reviewing a dispute resolution scheme. These fell within four areas: the use of online dispute resolution; the early stages of dispute resolution processes; mediation approaches; and the later stages of dispute resolution and building influence.
Regulating ADR: Lessons from the UK
This chapter analyses the manner in which the ADR Directive and ODR Regulation have been implemented in the UK, with a particular focus on the ombudsman sector. The chapter argues that in the UK implementation has been minimalist and that this represents a missed opportunity. The Directive is capable of laying the foundations for robust ADR, but the regulation of the sector looks deficient. As a result, there is a heightened risk that sub-optimal standards in the sector will go undetected which may in turn undermine user confidence. More work needs to be done to make the regulatory set-up a standard-bearer for the sector rather than a passive observer.
ADR and Cyberspace: The Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Online Commerce, Intellectual Property and Defamation
The growth of digital networked communication has presented some troubling questions for the legal field. In some instances, the nature of the medium does not pose much of a problem; the application by analogy to existing legal principles is fairly clear.1 Some issues arising from computermediated communication, however, are fundamentally new, with the novel and dynamic nature of the medium itself creating relationships unanticipated by a traditional, spatially-oriented body of law. The use and encouragement of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods could play a large and effective role in the adaptation process. The dominant feature in the online landscape right now is the Internet, and most issues discussed in this Note will relate primarily to it. The term "cyberspace," however, carries a more comprehensive meaning incorporating many types of digital networked communication, whether or not they rely on the Internet for execution, and apparently includes everything from satellites to cellular phones to computer bulletin board systems (BBSs). Naturally, the role of ADR in cyberspace will probably be greatest where there is a high degree of interactivity between a wide variety of users; at this point the Internet is the framework for such an environment. ADR's role in the decentralized regulation of cyberspace will be discussed in three suibstantive contexts: (1) the commercialization of cyberspace, (2) intellectual property and (3) defamation. Within each context, some problematic legal application issues will be presented, 3