The legal system provides any 2 disputing parties with a whole list of options, in terms of methods for resolving their dispute. One of those options, arbitration does not bet used very frequently. There is a reason for that low level of usage.
What is arbitration?
Designated as a method for ADR (alternative dispute resolution), arbitration compels both sides in a dispute to use a binding, appeal-lacking procedure. During utilization of that procedure, the contentious issue gets handed to either a single arbitrator or a board with 3 arbitrators. That one person, or that group of people hears the testimony offered by each side. Then, those that have heard that same testimony decides in favor of one side.
Arbitration’s key feature
From a lawyer’s point of view, arbitration’s key feature relates to the absence of a jury. That absence deprives a Personal Injury Lawyer in Mississauga of the chance to take advantage of the jury’s feelings. The decision made by the arbitrator or board gets based solely on what has been written into the law.
From the claimant’s point of view, arbitration’s principle feature concerns the fact that there is almost no way to appeal the decision made by the arbitrator or the board of arbitrators. Consequently, that decision remains binding, and brings a quick end to any claimant’s hopes for winning a generous compensation.
During what sort of dispute would the legal system call for utilization of arbitration?
A smart attorney avoids that one particular ADR, unless it has been required by contract. There are times, when the seller of a service has the buyer sign a contract. That contract might call for arbitrating a resolution to any future issues. The insurance industry provides students of personal injury law with two examples of such contracts. Both of those examples came into existence after the insurance industry created 2 new optional provisions. What were those provisions?
They were the uninsured motorist and the underinsured motorist provisions. Each provision allowed the policyholder to make a 1st party claim against the insurer, in order to obtain a promised compensation. A dispute might arise, if the insurer failed to deliver a suitable compensation package.
A claimant that wanted more money would need to sue the insurance company. According to the contract, that dispute could only get resolved by utilization of a specific ADR. That ADR would be the one that called for employment of either a single arbitrator or a board of arbitrators.
The insurance industry realized that arbitrators’ decisions seldom stemmed from an acknowledgement of anything other than matters of the law. Hence, insurers anticipated rulings that favored the defendant, in most cases. Personal injury lawyers know that arbitrators tend to favor the defendant.
