scholarly journals The New Ontario Judicial Alternative Dispute Resolution Model

1995 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 206
Author(s):  
Peter Bowal
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Resolution Model

The author introduces the new ADR Pilot Project currently being tried in the Ontario Court of Justice (General Division). Taking place in Toronto, the project is aimed at avoiding civil litigation. It involves ADR referral and management after filing of the Statement of Defence. First, the parties must meet. If the dispute remains unsettled, statements are submitted by the parties. The parties and counsel then attend an ADR session, which can be a mediation, mini-trial, or neutral evaluation. The advantages and disadvantages of the project are then detailed, for the parties, the public interest, and otherwise. The author notes that the pilot project stresses many of the same values that are dominant in provincial arbitration legislation. However, there are also significant differences between the schemes. In the end, the author is optimistic for the success of the project, but cautions that more time must pass before any meaningful assessments can be made.

scholarly journals PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PENGADAAN TANAH GUNA PEMBANGUNAN BANDAR UDARA INTERNASIONAL BERBASIS NILAI KEADILAN SOSIAL

NOTARIUS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Mia Permata Sari ◽  
Suteki Suteki
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Land Acquisition ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Land Dispute

In resolving land acquisition disputes for the public interest, it is fitting for the state to pay attention to values outside of the rule of law itself, including the value of social justice and the value of benefits to guarantee the basic rights of affected communities. This study aims to find out what factors cause the settlement of land acquisition disputes in terms of juridical aspects not reflecting the value of justice and benefit for the parties and formulating land acquisition dispute resolution models in a legal socio perspective that can realize the value of social justice and benefits for party. an appropriate method is needed that can accommodate the value of social justice and the benefits in resolving the dispute, among others, promoting the Consensus Meeting and the Need for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as an alternative solution. In addition, the need to calculate non-physical losses in the assessment of compensation for people who have lost their livelihoods due to land acquisition projects Keywords: Land Acquisition, Land Dispute Settlement, Public Interest AbstrakDalam penyelesaian sengketa pengadaan tanah untuk kepentingan umum sudah sepatutnya negara memperhatikan nilai-nilai diluar daripada aturan hukum itu sendiri, diantaranya nilai keadilan sosial dan nilai kemanfaatan untuk menjamin hak-hak dasar masyarakat terdampak. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk  untuk mengetahui faktor apa saja yang menyebabkan penyelesaian sengketa pengadaan tanah tersebut ditinjau dari aspek yuridis belum mencerminkan nilai keadilan dan kemanfaatan bagi para pihak sertaa merumuskan model penyelesaian sengketa pengadaan tanah dalam perspektif socio legal yang dapat mewujudkan nilai keadilan sosial dan kemanfaatan bagi para pihak. dibutuhkan suatu metode yang tepat yang dapat mengakomodasi nilai keadilan sosial dan kemanfaatan dalam penyelesaian sengketa tersebut diantaranya mengedepankan Musyawarah Mufakat dan Perlunya Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) sebagai solusi alternatif.. Selain itu, perlunya memperhitungkan kerugian non fisik dalam penilaian ganti rugi sehingga, terdapat solusi bagi masyarakat yang kehilangan mata pencaharianya akibat proyek pengadaan tanah Kata Kunci : Pengadaan Tanah, Penyelesaian Sengketa Tanah , Kepentingan Umum 

scholarly journals ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO RESOLVE LABOUR DISPUTES: PRACTICE OF UKRAINE AND THE EU

2020 ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
O. Terekh
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Comprehensive Information ◽  
Labour Disputes

This article explores alternative ways of resolving labour disputes through the analysis of relevant regulations of Ukraine and the Member States of the European Union, in particular, France, Bulgaria and Poland, and compares the relevant regulations in this area by contrasting the provisions of domestic and foreign legislation. The purpose of the article is to explore the ways to alternatively resolve labour disputes by analyzing the relevant legal doctrine and provisions of domestic and European law, to identify the advantages and disadvantages of such methods as mediation, conciliation, arbitration, to suggest ways to improve existing legislation. It is noted that the lack of proper legal regulation of alternative dispute resolution today is not the only. Thus, it emphasizes the need to train personnel who could perform the functions of mediators in labour disputes, as well as the need to conduct a comprehensive information policy to inform the public about the benefits of alternative dispute resolution as opposed to litigation, to which the author, in particular, relates the speed, efficiency and focus on maintaining labour relations. In addition, consideration is given to the feasibility of introducing mandatory pre-trial procedures for the settlement of labour disputes. The results of the study can be used for further research in the study of alternative ways of resolving labour disputes, and the formulated proposals can be used to improve existing legislation in the field of labour disputes. Keywords: a labor conflict, mediation, conciliation, arbitration courts, arbitration, a labor dispute commission.

Technische Universitaät Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG

2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-167
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Carstens
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Attention ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Mass Digitization

In Technische Universität Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ or Court) addressed several important copyright issues stemming from a practice that continues to confound many legal practitioners and adjudicators: the mass digitization of library collections. The judgment adds to an emerging body of jurisprudence decided in the context of a trend toward greater digitization that could ultimately facilitate the development of a global, digital library. To date, the jurisprudence has largely been formed by cases challenging mass digitization that are percolating through the United States courts and have attracted international attention and criticism. The ECJ decision thus provides an important point of reference for evaluating how different jurisdictions balance the rights of authors against the public interest, as served by relevant fair use exceptions consistent with their international obligations under traditional copyright treaties, the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty, and the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) applicable to all WTO member states.

Deliberative Democracy and Public Dispute Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Susskind ◽  
Jessica Gordon ◽  
Yasmin Zaerpoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Fact Finding

Deliberative democracy and public dispute resolution (PDR) have the same goal—to inform and determine the public interest—but they involve different skills and practices. This article considers the ways in which deliberative democratic approaches to policy-related decision-making can be supplemented with tools used in public dispute resolution—specifically, the use of an independent mediator, the well-developed technique of stakeholder assessment, and a new strategy called joint fact-finding, where stakeholders with different interests work together with outside experts to identify common assumptions, gather information together, and formulate and clarify opinions. All are designed to achieve fairer, wiser, more stable and more efficient outcomes.

scholarly journals Ventajas y Desventajas de la Conciliación en la Resolución de Conflictos – Sobre Reparación del Daño al Medio Ambiente

2016 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 111-139
Author(s):  
Angelina Isabel Valenzuela Rendón
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Environmental Damages ◽  
Development Goals

En el presente trabajo se exponen diversas ventajas y desventajas propias del medio alterno de solución de conflictos conocido como conciliación, esto a fin de dilucidar si se trata de un mecanismo adecuado para resolver controversias sobre reparación de daño causado al medio ambiente, lo que se realizará mediante la técnica metodológica cartesiana. Se observa que la conciliación es una forma de acceder a la justicia, adicional al proceso tradicional; además de que a través del procedimiento conciliatorio se fomenta la resolución pacífica de las disputas. Finalmente, se concluye que los pros de la conciliación tienen mayor peso que los contras. Por lo tanto, proponer el procedimiento conciliatorio significa ofrecer una alternativa de un mecanismo pertinente cuando se resuelven controversias sobre reparación del daño al medio ambiente; todo esto coadyuvando al logro de los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. In this research, different distinct advantages and disadvantages of the alternative dispute resolution known as conciliation are exposed. Through the Cartesian method, this presentation helps establish if conciliation is an adequate way to resolve disputes regarding reparation of environmental damage. Conciliation is a means to access justice, in addition to the traditional trial; furthermore, conciliation encourages the pacific resolution of disputes. Finally, it is concluded that the advantages of conciliation weigh more heavily than its disadvantages. Therefore, conciliation is a pertinent option to solve disputes regarding reparation of environmental damages, in order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Die Privilegierung der Landwirtschaft

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
General Public ◽  
Special Treatment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Debate

Even in an industrialised and service-based economy, agriculture is and remains a sector that is particularly worthy of protection and that operates not only in its own interest, but also in the interest of the general public. However, the social debate shows that the advantages and disadvantages of agriculture are not balanced on every farm. The study deals with the public interest in the privileged treatment of agriculture, i.e. the question of what justifies the special treatment of agriculture and what is "agriculture" in this sense.

scholarly journals Application of Environmental Conflict Resolution to Public Interest Issues in Water Disputes

2011 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Jeffrey QC ◽  
Donna Craig
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Environmental Conflict ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Conflict Resolution ◽  
Political Economic

This article examines the role of environmental conflict resolution (ECR) in the public interest issues of water disputes. The article endeavours to  illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of a range of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and negotiation approaches in the context of decision-making. Although many embrace ECR as the cheaper and more effective alternative to more formalistic and entrenched judicial processes before courts of law and quasi-judicial tribunals, the authors argue that there is an urgent need for a more critical, contextual and issue-oriented approach. In particular, the article highlights the significant difficulties associated with representing the full range of stakeholders who should be involved in an ADR process, and the lack of transparency and procedural safeguards associated with ADR in complex public interest disputes. The strength of ADR in smaller project-specific disputes involving a very limited number of stakeholders is well understood. The authors argue that ADR may have a significant role in scoping the issues and associated research as well as facilitating agreement on procedural aspects of large, complex public interest water disputes. However, ADR has severe limitations as a decision-making process. For example, water conflicts necessarily involve the concept of sustainability that in turn touches on a complex maze of social, political, economic and ecological values. The probability of reaching a mediated settlement in such a context is severely curtailed. A preferable approach may be one that is entirely transparent, capable of being both monitored and enforced, and is binding on all stakeholders whether or not they are parties to the mediation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document