ADR Bulletin

Book Reviews: International Commercial Arbitration & Principles of Dispute Resolution

Laurence Boulle — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:50:03 PDT

Extract:

Rumours about arbitration’s demise with the rise of ADR were, of course, largely exaggerated. Arbitration has in the last decade modernised itself, both in many domestic jurisdictions and internationally. This modernisation has led to a steady growth of arbitration practice in many countries. This book deals with legal and practical aspects of these developments, with particular reference to the Asia-Pacific region.

David Spencer is one of the foremost scribes in Australian ADR and his regular case commentaries in the Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal provide an excellent source of information and insight on the topic. This book has evolved out of the author’s previous editions of Essential Dispute Resolution and, after the standard definitional treatments, it deals seriatim with negotiation, mediation, arbitration and other dispute resolution processes. There are chapters on court-annexed dispute resolution, ethics and standards, and legal issues.

Researching good process - what impact does it have on fairness perceptions?

Peter Condliffe — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:50:01 PDT

Extract:

In 2001 NADRAC stated:

Despite their methodological shortcomings, research studies appear to support some of the claims of ADR, namely that it is responsive, quick, fair and informal, and that it is cheaper than litigation. Most parties appear to value ADR, and seem capable of making distinctions between substantive satisfaction and procedural satisfaction in that, while they may be unhappy with the outcome of the dispute, they appreciate the fairness of the procedure and the competence of practitioners.

Research by the author has raised some questions about how confidently one can assert, as NADRAC did in 2001, that adverse outcomes do not impact upon perceptions of the process.

Questioning our questions - expanding facilitative dispute resolution questioning techniques

Mieke Brandon — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:50:00 PDT

Extract:

Questioning is what a dispute resolution practitioner does most. The National Practice Standards for mediators require practitioners to demonstrate competence in the use of certain types of questions: How? What? When? Where? What if? What makes this important to you? What would it take to get this resolved? This range of questions opens up communications between the parties so the practitioner can facilitate, where appropriate, direct communication between them.

The Mediation Meta-Model - the realities of mediation practice

Nadja Alexander — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:49:59 PDT

Extract:

In this article, I expand on the literature and present a meta-model for thinking about mediation practice. The Mediation Meta-Model is a structure for identifying different mediation approaches and how they relate to one other. It makes no claim to universal application. Rather, it offers a conceptual road-map for an increasingly complex and sophisticated array of practices which share the name mediation. The theoretical foundations and analysis for the Meta- Model have been included in previous work (2008).

The mediator's opening statement

Margaret Halsmith — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:49:57 PDT

Extract:

This practice note arises out of my experience since the mid-1990s as a full-time mediator in a wide variety of two-party and multi-party disputes for business, government, families and individuals from Esperance to Kununurra in legal and relationship matters. It outlines some of the ‘what’, ‘how’, ‘when’ and ‘why’ of a mediator’s opening statement, raises certain issues and offers what might (for some) be nuggets. It is intended as a point of discussion.

Pre-mediation for mediators

Helen Shurven — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:49:56 PDT

Extract:

This practice note arises out of 17 years experience in dispute resolution, including mediating family disputes and native title issues, mediating and conciliating conflicts relating to health and disability care and treatment issues, and conciliating workplace issues.

Things I wish I'd known in 1998

David Bryson — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:45:25 PDT

Extract:

The ADR Bulletin is about to move from hard copy to soft copy after 13 years so as to more effectively continue its distinguished contribution to ADR in Australia. It has been a privilege for me to be involved in its first manifestation as part of the editorial group and I am grateful for the invitation to write a short piece at this juncture.

Editorial: New pastures for ADR

Laurence Boulle — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:45:17 PDT

Extract:

This is the final hard copy version of the ADR Bulletin after 12 years of publication involving three different publishers. In keeping with the times, the Bulletin will now be distributed electronically as part of the DRC News, published by the Dispute Resolution Centre at Bond University. The DRC News is published three times a year and currently has nearly 6000 subscribers in over 32 countries around the world.

Negotiation: Strategy Style Skills

Laurence Boulle — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:45:11 PDT

Extract:

This is the second edition of a well-known Australian text, the first version of which was authored 12 years ago by Alexander, Buckley and Rogers. This edition is fresh and vibrant, has new content and stimulus material, and advances both knowledge and skills for practitioners and students of the ubiquitous subject-matter it addresses. Its philosophical assumption is that ‘much of negotiation is learnable’, an approach which at the outset deserves two and a half hearty cheers.

Using facilitators in criminal jury trials in New South Wales - undermining 'trial by jury' or the way forward?

Joshua Grew — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:45:10 PDT

Extract:

Trial by jury is today provided for both in NSW legislation and in the Commonwealth Constitution. While the jury is colourfully described, among other things, as a bulwark of liberty, Lord Devlin in his 1956 book Trial by Jury makes perhaps one of the greatest claims of a jury’s importance:

Each jury is a little parliament. The jury sense is the parliamentary sense. I cannot see the one dying and the other surviving. The first object of any tyrant in Whitehall would be to make Parliament utterly subservient to his will; and the next to overthrow or diminish trial by jury, for no tyrant could afford to leave a subject’s freedom in the hands of twelve of his countrymen. So that trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution: it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives.