The Legal System and the Legal Forms of Business

The Legal System and the Legal Forms of Business

LAW 531

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

November 14th 2011

The Legal System and the Legal Forms of Business
The alternative dispute resolution is useful in the enforcing of justice and dispute settlement. ADR is highly significant in restructuring of the economy and managing of pressure and conflicts in business premises. Coming up with a consensual and effectual way to resolve a business dispute may be crucial for the business. This is not because it wants to reinforce the rule of law, but because the business reputation is threatened by the dispute. ADR is a more appropriate measure where a business cannot afford the expense of taking a case to court. Court processes may tend to be expensive, making the business acquire avoidable costs. These costs may lead to losses in the business. ADR is crucial where the backlog of cases reduces the efficiency of a court. This leads to delays in acquisition of justice by the business hence a setback in the operations of the business.
When the case presented by a business requires procedures that are complex, administration of justice and efficiency of the court are impaired. ADR is particularly crucial in such a situation in order to reduce the expenses that would be incurred by going to court. ADR will be beneficial to the business since it reduces the time that would be consumed in the court, which is an inconvenience to the business and the plaintiff (Sherwyn, 1999). Both parties come to an agreement in a fair understanding where he courts are not involved. ADR makes law suites private and less exposed o the public. This retains an upstanding image for the business. In turn, the business ceases to lose clients that would have a negative attitude towards the business, if the case was made public. This maintains the market share of the business and reduces chances of the business acquiring losses (Sherwyn, 1999).

When dealing with traditional litigation, the first risk that the business runs into is whether the business is being sued. Mostly lawyers of the business run the litigation part of the business. Lawyers sometimes have a tendency of forgetting that the business and the people who run them, as managers, have other valuable things to do so as to keep the business floating. This causes inconveniences and aggravation to the owners of the business, which can be considered a large risk to the business (Morris, 2001). Inconvenience is caused when the owner of the business is forced to gather documents that are considered indispensable in the case. In traditional litigations, inconveniences are caused when one is forced to make his staff hand in depositions. Another risk with traditional litigation is that one can be sued because of something he or the staff said about a client (Ury, 2000).
One of the biggest differences between traditional and modern litigation is that, in modern litigation, the company or business stands a chance of not going to court. Instead, a company can be offered what is known as Alternate Dispute Resolution otherwise known as ADR. While a company is offered this choice, it is highly advised that it takes the opportunity (Ury, 2000). Two reasons can be reached as to why a company should consider taking the alternative direction. If, by any chance, the insurance company is willing to pay the litigation, the business is meant to accept at once and get the paper work done in time. A business or organization, when dealing with traditional litigation, can risk deinting the company??™s image or the brand the business has. This can affect the business financially and even at some occasion destabilize the business (Ury, 2000).
In traditional litigation, the plaintiff, this being the person suing the business will provide the proof needed in the cases. The plaintiff is given the burden of presenting truthful evidence against the defendant, which will help in the suite. A judge or the jury makes the decision of whether the defendant is guilty of the crime being placed on him by the plaintiff. The arguments and cases presented by the plaintiff have to be strong enough backed by credible evidence in order to get the judges or juries attention. The plaintiff and the defendants spend a lot of money doing research about the suit, which means that cost will rise in both cases. The suite and cases presented in court by the plaintiff has several disadvantages to both the participants, this being the defendant and the plaintiff. In traditional litigation, the process is both time consuming and supremely expensive (Morris, 2001).
It is also considered a burden to the plaintiff since he or she has the duty of coming up with most of the arguments and present a case. In traditional litigation, the plaintiff is meant to come up with cases that will be strong enough in order to take the defense team down. The advantage about traditional litigation is that both parties are given the chances to research and come up with arguments that will help their case (Sherwyn, 1999). During this process of discovery, both teams form up concepts and theories, which are supported by the evidence that is relevant to the cases. This is meant to come up with efficient evidences against the defenses team.

References:
Morris, C. (2001). Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding: A Selected Bibliography. Victoria, Canada: Peacemakers Trust
Sherwyn, D. (1999). In Defense of Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Disputes: Saving the Baby, Tossing out the Bath Water, and Constructing a New Sink in the Process, 2 U. Pa. J. Lab. & Emp. L. 73
Ury, W. (2000). The Third Side: Why We Fight and How We Can Stop. New York, NY: Penguin Putnam Press

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

x

Hi!
I'm Victoria

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out