can someone please verify? quickly please!

[hard]

well my teacher gave me this question regarding alternative dispute resolution.

"list any 3 advantages and any 3 disadvantages of using A.D.R's explain each of these."

would that be talking about mediation arbitration conciliation and negotiation or would that be about tribunals because in the previous question he wrote:


"outline the jurisdiction for each other the following A.D.R's. VCAT listings (A) civil claims list (B) Anti discrimination list (C) residential tenancies list.

And one other thing; if i was to answer the first question regarding the term ADR as conciliation mediation ... etc then how would you rate this answer?

Alternative dispute resolution is a mean for avoiding the use of courts in civil disputes. There are many advantages of using this process with adverse negatives of using this system. Nevertheless, one of the advantages that alternative dispute resolutions provides for is that it is less expensive and much quicker than conventional use of courts. In some instances, disputes between two or more parties may be resolved in a matter of days. Courts have lengthy delays and may stall some cases for weeks, months or even years. This not only makes alternative dispute resolutions effective in its time management, but it also uses very little cost. Some ADR's require absolutely no legal representation which consequently saves hundreds and thousands of dollars for the litigant and the defendant. This can be seen in negotioation were parties can quickly and cheaply, at basically no cost, resolve disputes without delays and at their own convenience.

Another advantage of alternative dispute resolutions is the fact that parties involved usually feel more satisfied than taking court action and results provide for long term relationships and co-operation. ADR's can be more rewarding for some parties because of the fact that many parties in dispute usually look for apologies and rather than vast amounts of compensation and lengthy court action. ADR's also allow for the parties in dispute to communicate with each other to resolve the matter in dispute rather than relying on legal representation to use unscrupulous legal terminology and tactics to gain the favor of the judge. Not only does this allow for long term co-operation and results, but it favors both parties in a positive manner rather than a win lose situation. This can be seen in mediation were the mediator does not provide resolution's but rather have a harmonial discussion with the parties in dispute leaving the parties to resolve the issue individually were a win/win situation can occur.

A third advantage of Alternative dispute resolutions is for the informality of the way they are conducted compared to court action where if heard in superior courts, judges wear robes and wigs with very strict rules in place. The less formal structure of ADR's means that parties in dispute feel less threatened by the proceedings and actions taken to resolve an issue and allows for the parties to communicate, negotiate and conciliate between each other rather than rely on an impartial judge to make a decision for them.

While Alternative dispute resolution's have a number of advantages, they also have a great number of disadvantages. Firstly, while it is true that some ADR's are very cheap such as negotiation, the majority of ADR's  may cost just as much as court action. This can be seen in arbitration and mediation were adjudicator costs are considered, building costs and other factors that usually result in equal or higher fees than court action.

Not only are alternative dispute resolutions more costly, but they can also be biased and unfair. It is true that parties in dispute that take ADR rather than court action do not require legal representation, it is not however disallowed. A party may choose to have legal representation while the other may not be able to affords one. This can be seen as unfair when taking ADR methods such as negotiation or arbitration as the party with the legal representation will usually have an unfair advantage that will result in decisions being made in favor of the party with the legal representation.

One last disadvantage of Alternative disputer resolutions is for the fact the decisions made are usually not binding. This means that even after the parties have come to an agreement, they do not have to follow the decision as it is not binding. Not only does this provide for further disputes in the long term, but it also means that parties are able to break agreements which will still lead to court action and further costs on top of the cost of taking alternative dispute resolution methods.

tell me what you think of this ^.
thankyou