Alternative Disputes Resolutions or (ADRs) as they are commonly called can be used to settle disputes between individuals, small and large businesses, government, and the general public. If I am understanding what I am reading, an example could be: When a person passes and there is no will the children of that estate my dispute how it should be divided to the point that a mediator/lawyer is appointed to see that everyone receives an equal amount of the estate saving the parties money and time by not having it tied up in the courts.
The advantages of an ADR
• Often quicker than a trial
• An ADR is less expensive than normal legal costs
• It can preserve a business relationship
• Not as much time involved
• Privacy possibility of no public record
The Disadvantages of an ADR
• An ADR may not be suitable for everyone
• If the ADR process is binding, the parties normally give up most court protections, including a decision by a judge or jury under formal rules of evidence and procedure, and review for legal error by an appellate court.
• ADR may not be effective if it takes place before the parties have sufficient information to resolve the dispute.
• The neutral may charge a fee for his or her services. If the dispute is not resolved through ADR, the parties may then have to face the usual and traditional costs, such as attorney's fees and expert fees.
• Lawsuits must be brought within specified periods of time, known as Statutes of Limitations. Parties must be careful not to let a Statute of Limitation run while a dispute is in an ADR process