MAKING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) LESS ALTERNATIVE: THE NEED FOR ADR AS BOTH A MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENT AND A BAR EXAM TOPIC
<p>Over the last 30 years alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has become more prominent in Australian legal practice due to the need to reduce the cost of access to justice and to provide more expedient and informal alternatives to litigation. As legal educators, we need to ask: how should we be preparing law students entering practice for these changes? How can we ensure that once they become lawyers, our students will not rely entirely on litigious methods to assist their clients but instead look at alternatives for dispute resolution?</p><p>In this paper, I argue that there is no alternative to teaching ADR in clinic in order to address client needs and to ensure that students engaged in clinical education are prepared for changes in legal practice today. I show that the increasing focus upon ADR in Australian legal practice represents a challenge for law schools, and that legal educators need to ensure they are educating students about ADR.</p><p>I argue that it is important to determine whether ADR is being taught to students undertaking clinical legal education in ways that will enhance their preparation for legal practice. I will show that there is a need to explore: whether ADR is being taught within clinical legal education, the strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches, and how the teaching of ADR within clinics can be improved.</p>
This article examines current dispute resolution leaching and research programs in the context of improving access to justice through recent civil justice reform initiatives. Animated by extensive domestic and international literature, online and survey-based research, the article explores the landscape of alternative dispute resolution (primarily at law schools), comments on the need for continued thinking and reform and acts as a leading resource to assist in the ongoing, collaborative development of dispute resolution initiatives in education in Canada and abroad.
I began teaching, practicing, and researching law in the mid-1970s, first as a legal services and civil rights lawyer, then as a first-generation legal clinician, and then as a theorist and contributor to a variety of “movements” to change law and legal education: poverty law, clinical education, legal feminism, sociolegal studies, critical legal studies, alternative dispute resolution, legal ethics, law, literature and culture, and transnational legal studies. When I first began writing ...
Since the verdict of the Constitutional Court (MK) Number 93/PUU-X/2012 pronounced on Thursday, August 29, 2013, concerning the judicial review of Law No. 21 of 2008 on Islamic Banking, it is no longer dualism dispute resolution. The verdict as well as strengthen the jurisdiction of Religious Court to resolve Islamic banking disputes. In consideration of the judges, judges agreed stating that Article 55 paragraph (2) and (3) of Law No. 21 of 2008 which is an ideal norm, contains no constitutional problems. The problem is the explanation of the constitutional article 55 paragraph (2) of the Act. The emergence of the Constitutional Court verdict No. 93/PUU-X/2012 which substantially states that the explanation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law No. 21 of 2008 does not have binding force, basically does not violate the principle of freedom of contract which is common in contract law. The parties are allowed to make a dispute resolution agreement out of religious court based on provisions as Act No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Keywords: dispute resolution, legal certainty and the principle of freedom of contract
<p align="center"> </p><p><em>In line with the increasing demands of the business in the era of globalization, especially related to the resolution of business conflicts, business people have tried to find alternative dispute resolution methods other than justice. This is because the judicial institution as a legal institution that should be able to play its role in efforts to resolve various kinds of business conflicts, is in reality not as expected by business people. There is support for normative formalities. Therefore alternative dispute resolution institutions can be used as a very possible choice. This alternative institution is considered more effective in various aspects of business dispute resolution, in response to the demands of very fierce business competition. Some economic benefits gained from choosing a solution through ADR (Alternative Despute Resolution) are that this model is not formal, saves more time and also minimize costs in dispute resolution.</em></p><p> </p>
Keeping up with change: no alternative to teaching ADR in clinic. An Australian perspective