The Argument for Choosing State's Judicial System or a "Private" Outsourced Resolution of Disputes: a Practising Attorney's Point of View

Jorg Sladič

Jorg Sladič Unversity of Maribor http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7498-2877

Keywords: ADR, arbitration, mediation, outsourced mediation, court-connected mediation, choice of ADR, State as party in litigation and AD

Abstract

Terms such as arbitration, mediation, conciliation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are nowadays standard terms in any classroom textbook on civil procedure. Legal scholars enumerated and assessed in depth the advantages and disadvantages of any type of outsourced dispute resolution. However, a number of legal writers still fail to enumerate the exact differences in course of events and all of the trade-offs that a party will have when deciding to resolve the dispute using an outsourced dispute resolution. Clearly the costs, the celerity and the flexibility are important issues. However, the decision is not influenced solely by legal arguments. This paper will mention some typical Slovenian issues in an assessment of the choice of dispute resolution. If parties want to continue to remain in good terms after the dispute, then an outsourced dispute resolution is highly recommended. Judicial rulings are to binary; one party wins, one loses.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Jorg Sladič, Unversity of Maribor

Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Law office Sladič-Zemljak, Kersnikova 7, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, University of Maribor, Faculty of Law, Mladinska ulica 9, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia, e-mail: jorg.sladic@gmail.com.

References

Betetto, N. in Galič, A. (2009) “Poravnalni narok in sodna poravnava”, p. 17–49, in Ude, L. et al. (eds.), “Pravdni postopek, Zakon s komentarjem” (Ljubljana: Uradni list).

Braun, J. (2014) Lehrbuch des Zivilprozeßrechts (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr).

Calkins, R., M. (2011) “Mediation: A Revolutionary Process that is Replacing the American Judicial System”, Rutgers Conflict Resolution Law Journal, 13(1), p. 1–59.

de Roo, A., and Jagtebnerg, R. (2012) “The Relevance of Truth, The Case of Mediation versus Litigation”, p. 27–46, in: van Rhee, C. H. & Uzelac, A. (eds.), “Truth and Efficiency in Civil Litigation” (Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland: Intersentia).

Đuričin, B. (2013) “Pregovaranje kao metoda alternativnog rješavanja sporova”, p. 605–613, in: Uzelac, A. in Garašić, J. in Maganić, A. (eds), “Djelotvorna pravna zaštita u pravičnom postupku, Liber amicorum Mihajlo Dika” (Zagreb: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu).

Eiseman, N. M., Bulman, J., in Dunn, Th. R. (2013) “A Tale of Two Lawyers: How Arbitrators and Advocates Can Avoid the Dangerous Convergence of Arbitration and Litigation”, Cardozo journal of conflict resolution, 14, p. 683–725.

Jovin – Hrastnik, B. (2009) “Med obveznim in neobveznim alternativnim reševanjem sporov”, Podjetje in delo, 35(6–7), p. 1123–1130.

Juhart, J. (1962) Civilno izvršilno pravo – oris (Ljubljana: Univerzitetna založba).

Jung, F. (2014) “Die Sportschiedsgerichtsbarkeit im Lichte des Art. 6 EMRK”, Zeitschrift für europarechtliche Studien, 17(2), p. 173–209.

Knežević, G. (2012) Marginalije o pojmovima privatne pravde i ADR-a s aspekta arbitraže i medijacije, Zagreb: Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu, 62(1–2), p. 417–436.

Langbein, J. H. (2012) “The Demise of Trial in American Civil Procedure: How it Happened, Is It Convergence with European Civil Procedure?” p. 119–194, in: van Rhee, C. H. in Uzelac, A. (eds.), “Truth and Efficiency in Civil Litigation” (Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland: Intersentia).

Miranda, A. (2014) “The origins of mediation and the A.D.R. Tools”, p. 9–26, Miranda, A. (ed.), “Mediation in Europe at the cross-road of different legal cultures” (Ariccia: Aracne editrice).

Sajovic, R. (1939) Civilni pravdni postopek s kratkimi pojasnili (Ljubljana: Univerzitetna tiskarna).

Schütz, J. G. (2015) Europäische Richtlinie über bestimmte Aspekte der Mediation in Zivil- und Handelssachen, Aktuelle Juristische Praxis/Pratique actuelle juridique, 1, p. 106 122.

Sikirić, H. (2013) “Pravo mjerodavno za objektivnu arbitrabilnost”, p. 493 – 519, in: Uzelac, A & Garašić, J. & Maganić, A. (eds), “Djelotvorna pravna zaštita u pravičnom postupku, Liber amicorum Mihajlo Dika”, Zagreb: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 2013.

Spillane, J. P., Oyedele, L. O., Hande, E., von Meding, J., Konanahalli, A., Jaiyeoba, B. E. in Tijani, I. K. (2011), “Mediation within Irish construction industry: Identifying success factors for appropriate competencies and processes”, Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 8(3), p. 142–150, available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/JLCR.

Škundrić, P. (2012) Mediacija kot oblika alternativnega reševanja individualnih delovnih sporov - primerjalno pravni pregled z Anglijo, LL.M. paper (Maribor: Pravna fakulteta).

Stürner, R. (2014) “Liberalismus und Zivilprozess”, Österreichische Jurristen-Zeitung, 64(14–15), p. 629–639.

Uzelac, A. (2010) “Survival of the Third Legal Tradition”, Supreme Court Law Review, 49, p. 377–396.

Uzelac, A., Aras, S., Maršić, M., Mitrović, M., Kauzlarić, Ž., Stojčević, P. (2010), “Aktualni trendovi mirnog rješavanja sporova u Hrvatskoj : dosezi i ograničenja”, Zagreb: Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu, 60(3), p. 1265–1308.