Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Archive for the ‘Policy-making’ Category

Canada’s First Online Tribunal Getting Ready to Launch

Just Court ADR, April 10th, 2015

In 2012, British Columbia passed the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, which established a new aspect of BC’s justice system that will provide online dispute resolution services for strata (condominium) and small claims cases. The Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) will be Canada’s first online tribunal and is expected to launch later this year. The CRT will take disputants through a series of online tools designed to help resolve the dispute as effectively and efficiently as possible. For example, disputants first will be led through resources designed to provide information and diagnose the problem. The next phase involves part-to-party negotiation through the online system. For parties that are unable to negotiate a settlement on their own, the next phase offers case management and facilitated dispute resolution. Parties still unable to come to an agreement may move to adjudication, where they will be able to ask the tribunal to issue a decision. Because the CRT’s dispute resolution services will be available online, users will be able to access them from home or from a mobile device, 24 hours a day. To further facilitate access to justice, the CRT will allow “helpers” to aid disputants who do not read English or need assistance with technology. The language access already provided by the court will be made available, and the CRT will also employee multilingual staff, when possible, and make telephone interpretation available.

Last month, Bill 19, the Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, was introduced in the legislature. The amended act would require most strata and many small claims cases to be diverted to the CRT, expanding its authority. (more…)

Big News in Court ADR — A Look Back at 2014

Just Court ADR, December 18th, 2014

Our monthly e-newsletter Court ADR Connection has updates on RSI’s activities, cutting-edge ADR research, and the latest court ADR news from across the country. As we wind down 2014, I thought it might be fun to take a look at a few of the most significant news stories we reported on this year.

Detroit Bankruptcy Mediated in “Grand Bargain”

The most-watched court ADR news story of 2014 may have been the mediated settlement that resolved the City of Detroit’s municipal bankruptcy. Without doubt, this riveting drama of competing interests coming together to form a “Grand Bargain” will be studied and discussed for years to come. We reported on facets of this story a few times, both here in our blog and in our newsletter: (more…)

The Ups and Downs of ADR Policymaking

Just Court ADR, September 17th, 2014

This is the story of how a law intended to increase mediation use led to a dramatic drop-off in mediation and what was done to try to fix the error.

In April 2013, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act came into force in England and Wales. The law cut legal aid, which formerly had been available for nearly all civil cases. In family law, legal aid for court cases was now only available for cases that involved allegations of domestic violence or child abuse. However, government funding for mediation of family case was increased by ten million pounds.  (more…)

Grievance Procedures and Mediation Policy Goals

Jennifer Shack, August 6th, 2014

Here’s something I wrote for RSI’s e-newsletter this month that I thought would interest our blog readers as well:

Parties to court mediation in Florida have the opportunity to submit their complaints regarding a mediator to a robust grievance process. The structure includes four stages: committee review to determine whether a complaint is facially sufficient; a preliminary review of rules that may have been violated and the mediator’s response to the complaint, which are used to determine probable cause; a meeting between mediator and complainant; and a formal hearing.  In “Mediator Ethical Breaches: Implications for Public Policy” (Penn State Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation, Vol. 6, p. 107 (2014)), Sharon Press examines this grievance process and finds that the burden of proof required at the formal hearing stage has the potential to undermine the policy goals of mediation programs. (more…)

Verified by ExactMetrics