SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTES RESOLUTION

Project topic:
INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES TOWARDS THE
DEVELOPMENT OF ADR

SUBMITTED BY
SHIKHAR NEELKANTH
ROLL NO. 1233
TH
3 YEAR, 6 SEMESTER, B.B.A. LL.B(HONS.)

SUBMITTED TO
PROF. HRISHIKESH MANU
FACULTY OF adr

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 ADR 2
International Initiative Towards ADR

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...............................................................................................................3

AIM AND OBJECTIVES...............................................................................................................5

HYPOTHESIS.................................................................................................................................5

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................6

GLOBAL NECESSITY OF ADR...................................................................................................7

ADR IN DIVERSE COUNTRIES..................................................................................................9

ADR in United States of America................................................................................................9

ADR in United Kingdom...........................................................................................................13

GLOBAL ADR INSTITUTIONS.................................................................................................16

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)......................................................................................16

World Trade Organization (WTO)............................................................................................17

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)..............................................................................17

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).................................17

Institute for the Study and Development of Legal Systems.......................................................18

Other Treaties.............................................................................................................................18

CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................19

BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................20

BOOKS:.....................................................................................................................................20

WEB-SOURCES:......................................................................................................................20
 ADR 3
International Initiative Towards ADR

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Before we get into thick of things, it gives me great pleasure to acknowledge with deep sense
of gratitude and appreciation to all those people who gave me their unending support and
cooperation while completing this project work. They all rendered their valuable time and
services in making this project a success.

Firstly, I would like to thank the all mighty God for giving blessing and support in helping
me to complete this project.

I gratefully acknowledge Mr. Hrishikesh Manu, Faculty in-charge (ADR), CNLU, Patna, for
giving me the opportunity to work on the project. His encouragement and support throughout
has helped me in successfully completing the project.

I am even thankful to our institution, Chanakya National Law University, Patna to give me
such an interesting project to work on.

At last, but not the least, I express my sincere thanks to my parents for their generous support
and cooperation throughout the project.

Shikhar Neelkanth
 ADR 4
International Initiative Towards ADR

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The researcher aims to study and understand that the promotion of alternative methods of dispute
resolution has been aided largely by international initiatives taken in this regard.

HYPOTHESIS

The researcher believes that ADR society has taken birth in both developed and developing
countries and India is not any exception. It has also become an efficacious way of handling
international commercial disputes by many countries.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The researcher adopts doctrinal research methodology and thus relies on books, articles,
newspapers, magazines, journals, websites etc.
 ADR 5
International Initiative Towards ADR

INTRODUCTION

Gandhiji said: "I had learnt the true practice of law. I had learnt to find out the better side of
human nature, and to enter men's hearts. I realized that the true function of a lawyer was to unite
parties given as under. The lesson was so indelibly burnt unto me that the large part of my time,
during the twenty years of my practice as a lawyer, was occupied in bringing about private
compromises of hundreds of cases. I lost nothing, thereby not even money, certainly not my
soul."
Conflict is a fact of life. It is not good or bad. However, what is important is how we manage or
handle it. Negotiation techniques are often central to resolving conflict and as a basic technique
these have been around for many thousands of years. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
refers to a variety of streamlined resolution techniques designed to resolve issues in controversy
more efficiently when the normal negotiation process fails. Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) is an alternative to the Formal Legal System. It is an alternative to litigation. It was being
thought of in view of the fact that the Courts are over burdened with cases. The said system
emanates from dissatisfaction of many people with the way in which disputes are traditionally
resolved resulting in criticism of the Courts, the legal profession and sometimes lead to a sense
of alienation from the whole legal system- thus, the need for Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Quote of the Chapter: "Virtually every State has experimented with some form of ADR, and the
number of private arbitrations and mediations handled through the American Arbitration
Association alone have nearly doubled in the past decade, to a projected 90,000 in 1998. This
growth seems to confirm Hoagland's claim that alternative dispute resolution is the dispute
resolution mechanism of the future."—U.S. News and World Report

ADR is the current global practice when it comes to resolving conflicts without one party
branding the other as 'enemy'. The necessity and utility of ADR is indisputable. The emergence
of alternative dispute resolution has been one of the most significant movements as a part of
conflict management and judicial reform, and it has become a global necessity.' In this global
 ADR 6
International Initiative Towards ADR

world where there is market everywhere, there is a strong need to assess the present laws in
context of emerging ADR trends worldwide. It is equally important to analyze our available
methods in ADR in view of ADR systems at global level.

GLOBAL NECESSITY OF ADR

ADR Legislation—A Must for Each Country

Lawyers, law students, law-makers and law interpreters have started viewing disputes resolution
in a different and divergent environmental light and with many more alternatives to the litigation.
ADR is, now, visualized and deep-rooted in the ethics of the Bench and the Bar and is an integral
segment of modern practice.

The Harvard Business School also a few years before added dispute resolution as a new course
as a part of its curriculum. International Community paid attention towards this traditional
alternative means for settlement of disputes by way of arbitration, conciliation and mediation. It
is to be seen that not only in India but also in China, England and United States of America this
traditional alternative means for settlement of disputes was prevailing since long. Now, the
international business community is of firm opinion that alternative dispute resolution-ADR is
the only means or way to get rid from the demerits of the present legal system. In all the
countries where most people opt for litigation to resolve disputes, there is excessive over-
burdening of Courts and a large number of pending cases, which has ultimately lead to
dissatisfaction among people regarding the judicial system and its ability to dispense Justice.
However, the blame for the large number of pending cases in these developing countries or
docket explosion, as it is called, cannot be attributed to the Courts alone. The cause for it being
the non-implementation of negotiation processes before litigation. It is against this milieu that the
mechanisms of Alternative Dispute Resolution are being introduced in all the countries. These
mechanisms, which have been working effectively in providing an amicable and speedy solution
for conflicts in developed economies, are being suitably amended and incorporated in the
developing countries in order to strengthen the judicial system.
 ADR 7
International Initiative Towards ADR

ADR in Developing & Developed Countries

India is not the only country which is buffeted by arrears of Court cases. Even the developed
countries such as the United States of America and the United Kingdom suffer from this
problem, albeit on a lesser scale. The USA and, following its motivation, numerous countries,
including Australia, Canada, Germany, Holland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa,
Switzerland and the United Kingdom have been using over the last 30 years or so what is
universally known as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that persuaded the disputants to
arrive at a negotiated understanding with a smallest amount of outside help. 1 ADR is now and on
the rise and time-honored tool of change in dispute management in American and European
business communities. Now ADR has become fashionable and attractive in USA, UK, Canada,
Hong Kong and Australia as it is effective, cost wise efficient and quick form of dispute
resolution.2 In the last two decades, ADR initiatives have mushroomed in developing and
developed countries alike.

1
P.C. Rao and William Sheffiled: “Alternative Dispute Resolution-What it is and how it works?”, P.24, 1997 edn.
Rep. 2002.
2
O.P. Motiwal; “Alternative Dispute Resolution”, P.453.
 ADR 8
International Initiative Towards ADR

ADR IN DIVERSE COUNTRIES

Worldwide, the ADR society has taken birth in both developed and developing countries and
India is not any exception. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a name that refers to
numerous diverse (but philosophically allied) methods of resolving trade disputes outside
customary legal and administrative structures. ADR originated in the USA in 1970s in a drive to
discover alternatives to the customary legal system, felt to be adversarial, costly, unpredictable,
rigid, over-professionalized, damaging to relationships, and limited to narrow rights-based
remedies as opposed to creative problem solving. In fact informal dispute resolution has a long
practice in many of the world societies dating back to 12th century in China, England and
America. The commercial world has rightly recognized the advantages that the ADR in one form
or other is a right solution.

It is believed that it is less costly, less adversarial and thus more favorable to the preservation of
trade relationships which is of critical importance in the trade world. The use of ADR has grown
vastly in the global business field in recent years. The growth has been allowable by numerous
factors including great expansion of global commerce and the recognition of global economy.
Many governments around the world have supported the demand for ADR as an efficacious way
of handling international commercial disputes. We discover that ADR has also become an
ordinary provision in United States trade treaties and the United States has been the strongest
supporter of global commercial ADR. Many experts in this field are of the strong opinion that
the impact of ADR on international commerce is great and will continue to expand. 3 Many
countries have adopted the Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism. Nevertheless, it is for
time to see how effective the implementation of these mechanisms would be in these countries.
Internationally, the ADR movement has also taken off in both developed and developing
countries.

3
Jeffery M. Senger-Federal Dispute Resolution: Using ADR with the United States Government (2004). See also
Jayachandra Reddy: "Alternative Dispute Resolution" Supra n. 2, p. 79. See also Kleiner, Carolyn: "The Action Out
of Court." U.S. News and World Report. May 29, 1999. Aiso visit hg.org for more information on USA ADR.
 ADR 9
International Initiative Towards ADR

ADR in United States of America

Even though, generally known for its inclination for litigation, the USA has one of the world's
most superior and winning systems for settlement of disputes outside the formal legal system
through mechanisms of mediation and arbitration. Although mediation goes back hundreds of
years, alternative dispute resolution has grown rapidly in the United States since the political and
civil conflicts of the 1960s.4 Processes like mediation and arbitration soon became popular ways
to deal with a variety of conflicts, because they helped relieve pressure on the overburdened
Court system.

The ADR setting in the United States is multifaceted and diverse. The growth in both the use and
the development of ADR mechanisms has resulted from programs at all levels and from all limbs
of Government-executive, legislative, and judiciary—and from many areas of the private quarter
community organizations, corporations and the bar.5

1. Past Perspectives

Employ of arbitration in USA existed before the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution. For instance, arbitral tribunals were created as early on as 1768 in New York and
soon thereafter in other cities mainly to resolve disputes in the clothing, printing and merchant
seaman industries. Arbitration first received the approval of the Supreme Court in 1854 when
the Court endorsed the right of an arbitrator to give binding awards.6

Speaking for the Court, Justice Grier observed that "Arbitrators are Judges chosen by the parties
to decide the matter submitted to them, finally and without appeal. As a mode of settling

4
The introduction of new laws protecting individual rights, as well as less tolerance for discrimination and injustice,
led more people to file lawsuits in order to settle conflicts. For example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed
"discrimination in employment or public accommodations on the basis of race, sex, or national origin." Laws such
as this gave people new grounds for seeking compensation for ill-treatment. At the same time, the women's
movement and the environmental movements &'ere growing as well, leading to another host of Court cases. The
result of all these changes was a significant increase in the number of lawsuits being filed in U.S. Courts. Eventually
the system became overloaded with cases, resulting in long delays and sometimes procedural errors.
5
Woodard, Kathy L.: "Arbitration Growing in Popularity for Its Cost Benefietsr, Efficiency." Business First-
Columbus. June 16, 2000. See also Dana H. Frey "The American Experience in the Field of ADR" Supra n. 2, pp.
108-122.
6
Burchell v. Marsh, 58 U.S. 344 (1854). See also Parselle, Charles (2005) The Complete Mediator. New York:
Weisberg Publications.199Bou.rtsoen.es, John, Conflict: Human Needs Theory. New York: St. Martin's Press, also
Schoene, L. P. & DuPraw, M. (1992). Facing racial and cultural conflict: Tool for rebuilding community.
Washington, DC: Program for Community Pr°blern Solving.
 ADR 10
International Initiative Towards ADR

disputes, it should receive every encouragement from the Courts of equity." 7 It was New York
that passed the earliest State law in USA in 1920 that accepted voluntary agreements to arbitrate.
Just two year afterward, commerce leaders evolved a novel educational organization—The
Arbitration Society of America—which mainly persuaded the passing of the Federal Arbitration
Act (FAA) in 1925. The FAA offered the statutory frame to implement arbitration clauses in
inter-State contracts and crafted the base upon which contemporary arbitration agreements are
fabricated in our day. In 1926, the Arbitration Society fused with one more foundation to shape
the American Arbitration Association (AAA) which is currently one of the biggest private ADR
service providers in the USA.

Regardless of these, arbitration was not accepted in all places in the United States. As late as the
1960s, a contractual arbitration clause was -revocable in half of the States at the will of either
party. Besides, USA did not ratify the UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 (New York Convention) until 1970—twelve years after it was
promulgated. In the 1970s, broad-based advocacy for augmented employ of ADR systems
appeared. This trend, often described in USA as the "alternative dispute resolution movement",
was formally recognized by the American Bar Association in 1976 when it established a Special
Committee on Minor Disputes (now called the Dispute Resolution Section).

The mission of the Office of Dispute Resolution (US Department of Justice) is to promote and
facilitate the broad and effective use of ADR processes by the Department of Justice and
throughout the Executive Branch of the federal Government. The office also represents the
Attorney General in leadership of federal ADR through the Interagency ADR Working Group
Steering Committee, an organization which was created by the President and convened by the
Attorney General to promote the use of ADR throughout federal executive branch agencies.

2. CDR Centers

The community dispute resolution movement egged from the community activism of the 1960s
and facilitated to push the ADR movement commonly. With the Civil Rights Act in 1964 came
the conception of the Community Relations Services (CRS) which employed mediation and
negotiation to aid in stopping cruelty and resolving community-wide racial and ethnic clashes.

7
Burchell v. Marsh, 58 U.S. 344 (1854) at 349.
 ADR 11
International Initiative Towards ADR

The CRS assisted to decide various disputes involving schools, police, prisons and other
Government entities all through the 1960s.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, federal LEAA-Law Enforcement Assistance Administration
funded both an arbitration program and a mediation program, each in an urban United States
city, designed to assist and resolve disputes within these communities. Using these programs as a
role-model, more than six other urban communities created pilot neighborhood Justice centers.
By 1980, more than eighty communities based alternative dispute resolution centers were in
action.

The Community Dispute Resolution Centers Program (CDRCP) enabled in 1981 is a component
of the New York State Unified Court System's (UCS) Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) Programs. The CDRCP contracts with not for profit organizations in all 62 counties of
New York State to provide dispute resolution services to individuals, organizations and
communities. The legislation was made permanent in 1984, and the Unified Court System now
funds local community dispute resolution centers that serve the needs of citizens.

Augmented support from the private sector, together with successful alignments with certain
federal and State agencies and non-profit organizations, helped many such programs grow to
more than 400 local community Justice centers presently operating throughout USA. Recent
estimates specify that more than several hundred thousand cases per year are being handled by
such community-based dispute resolution programs. This community-based ADR trend has been
further expanded to reach public and private school systems. Presently, more than 4,000 schools
throughout USA have developed successful peer mediation programs whereby children learn to
peaceably resolve disputes occurring among the students. In 1988: began mediation between
teens and their parents and caregivers, now called Family Talk. In 2009, CDRC celebrated its
25th Anniversary.

Emphasizing these triumphant school programs, the American Bar Association Section on
Dispute Resolution declared its theme for 1995-96 to be "Children, Courts and Dispute
Resolution." The goal of this program is to increase the employ of ADR both in the schools and
in the Courts for the benefit of children.

3. Dispute Resolution in Judicial Structure

 ADR 12
International Initiative Towards ADR

Ever since the enactment in 1990of the Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA), which calls for every
federal district Court with the help of an advisory group of local lawyers, scholars, and other
citizens to employ a civil Justice expense and delay reduction plan, there has been incredible
growth of ADR program and the employ of ADR by federal and State Courts.

4. Government Agencies and ADR

Government agencies have increasingly been making ADR methods more accessible to parties
with which they have disputes. This is based, in part, on legislation such as the Alternative
Dispute Resolution Act of 1990 (ADRA) and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990. The
ADRA authorized federal agency use of ADR, including binding arbitration and required every
agency to take up an ADR policy for all types of actions, including formal and informal
adjudications, rulemaking, enforcement actions, license or permit issuance and revocation
contract administration and litigation. Each agency was required to—

(a) Designate a dispute resolution officer;

(b) Provide ADR training for agency employees; and

(c) Review all standard agency agreements and grants to determine whether or not an
amendment to include ADR would be appropriate. In response, almost every agency appointed a
dispute resolution officer

and developed pilot programs and policies to make ADR a compatible any: desirable option for
resolving controversies.

ADR in United Kingdom

It is a sign of Mediation or (as it is called) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) taking off that
one thinks twice now about explaining what ADR actually is. In 1996 most lawyers, other
professionals and commercial people in general know, at any rate in overall terms, what ADR is
about. ADR in the UK is perhaps in advance of other countries. ADR has developed relatively
quickly in the UK partly because of the problems presented in the recent past by the unwieldy
 ADR 13
International Initiative Towards ADR

and expensive process of UK litigation and lawyer dominated arbitration. The UK's close
relationship to the US legal system has also helped the common Anglo-Saxon legal base.8

1. Lord Woolf's 1986 Report

Interest in alternative dispute resolution has been growing steadily among the Judiciary and legal
profession over the last decade. A significant push came from Lord Woolf's 1986 report ‘Access
to Justice’ that identified the need for fair, speedy and proportionate resolution of disputes. Those
principles lay at the heart of the Civil Procedure Rules, which came into force in April 1999. The
civil procedure rules included references to ADR in rules of Court and introduced pre-action
protocols, with their emphasis on settlement, even before Court proceedings are issued.

2. Small Claims Mediation at Manchester County Court

From the evaluation findings, the most successful scheme for settling small claims cases was
found to be the model based at Manchester. The Manchester scheme has a trained in-house
mediator provide a free service for Court users giving parties the option of a mediation session,
either by phone or face-to-face appointment, before the Court hearing. Mediations normally last
up to one hour. If the mediation is not successful, the case will progress to the hearing as normal.
Following the successful scheme at Manchester, the small claims mediation service is being
expanded to other HMCS Areas in 2007/2008

3. Mediation Week

To raise awareness of mediation and the opportunities it offers for resolving disputes, Her
Majesty's Courts Service runs the annual Mediation Week campaign. Courts around England and
Wales take part, arranging events to promote mediation. Activities held to date have included
seminars for the Judiciary and Court staff, mediation advice desks, community open days and
presentations for local law students. The Law Society has also designed training seminars and
awareness workshops, and advice agencies such as Community Legal Service Direct and
Citizens' Advice Bureaux have publicised the benefits of mediation to their advisers.

4. National Mediation Helpline (NMH)

8
Karl Mackie and Edward Lightburn: "International Mediation—The UK Experience" Supra n. 2, pp. 137- al
Mediation 142. See also The British Columbia Arbitration & Mediation Institute, "ADR Rules & Procedures".
 ADR 14
International Initiative Towards ADR

The National Mediation Helpline (NMH) provides Court users and the general public in England
and Wales with access to information about mediation, and if requested can make the necessary
arrangements for a low-cost mediation appointment. The service is accessed via phone (0845 60
30 809) or by the NMI-I website. The service is administered independently by an associate
member of the Telephone Helplines Association and is available Monday to Friday, from 8.30
am to 6.00 pm. The NM1-I won the award for innovation at the 2006 Excellence in Alternative
Dispute Resolution awards. For further information about the awards visit the Centre for
Effective Dispute Resolution website.

The Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the Department of Trade and
Industry, and the City of London, all actively support CEDR.

5. The Proportionate Dispute Resolution Team

This work to promote proportionate dispute resolution is being taken forward by the better
dispute resolution team in the civil and family directorate of HMCS. They are responsible for the
delivery of public service agreement 5 (PSA 5). PSA 5 States that people should have access to
the information and wie range of services they need to understand their rights and responsibilities
be avoid legal problems where possible. Where this is not possible they should be able to resolve
their disputes effectively and proportionately. The aim is to achieve earlier and more
proportionate resolution of legal problems and disputes by-

(i) increasing advice and assistance to help people resolve their disputes earlier and more
effectively;
(ii) increasing the opportunities for people involved in Court cases to settle their disputes
out of Court; and
(iii) reducing delays in resolving those disputes that need to be decided by the Courts.

6. Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR)

The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) is an independent, non-profit organization
with a mission to cut the cost of conflict and create choice and capability in dispute prevention
and resolution. It has the largest independent alternative dispute resolution body in Europe, has
access to over 5000 mediators and neutrals worldwide. Its expertise has been called on by over
 ADR 15
International Initiative Towards ADR

40,000 individuals and organizations across the globe. It offers leading expertise in consultancy,
training, and coaching to enhance skills and capability in negotiation and conflict management,
including the leading internationally recognized Mediator Skills Training and Accreditation
programme. Working in the UK and internationally, CEDR's work is supported by businesses,
law firms and public sector organizations.

GLOBAL ADR INSTITUTIONS

For the purpose of constituting an arbitral panel, one can pursue one of the two paths accessible.
One can go for ad hoc arbitration whereby the parties themselves constitute an arbitral panel and
make their own rules for arbitration. On the other hand, there is the option of institutional
arbitration. The rise of international trade law, continental trading blocs, the World Trade
Organization (and its opposing anti-globalization movement), and use of the Internet, among
other factors, seem to suggest that legal complexity has started to reach an intolerable and
undesirable point.

Among the prominent foreign arbitral institutions, mention can be made of American Arbitration
Association (AAA) in USA, London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) in United
Kingdom, Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) in Sweden and Arbitral Center of the
Federal Economic Chamber in Vienna. In India, we find institutions like the Indian Council of
Arbitration, International Centre for ADR, which are offering similar arbitration and mediation
facilities. However, all but few remained off-line arbitration and conciliation centers. The
various institutions9 promoting the ADR mechanisms all over the world are listed below:

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), also known as the Hague Tribunal is an international
organization based in The Hague in the Netherlands. It was established in 1899 as one of the acts
of the first Hague Peace Conference, which makes it the oldest institution for international
dispute resolution. In 2002, 96 countries were party to the treaty. The Court deals in cases
submitted to it by the consent of the parties involved and handle cases between countries and

9
See law & Justice institutions on website of world bank. See also APPENDIX-B. See also Mayer, Bernio. Beyond
Neutrality: Confronting the Crisis in Conflict Resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004, See also Kolb, D.M.,
and Bartunek, J.M.Hidden Conflict in Organizations: Uncovering Behind-the-Scenes Disputes. Newbury Park, CA.
 ADR 16
International Initiative Towards ADR

between countries and private parties. The PCA is housed in the Peace Palace in The Hague,
which was built specially for the Court in 1913 with an endowment from the Carnegie
Foundation. The same building also houses the International Court of Justice, though the two
institutions operate separately.

World Trade Organization (WTO)

The World Trade Organisation is an international organisation which oversees a large number of
agreements defining the "rules of trade" amongst its member States. The WTO is the successor
to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and operates with the broad goal of reducing or
abolishing international trade barriers. The WTO has two basic functions: as a negotiating forum
for discussions of new and existing trade rules, and as a trade dispute settlement body. The
function of WTO as a trade dispute settlement body is important in this context. The WTO has
significant power to enforce its decisions, through the Dispute Settlement Body, an international
trade Court with the power to authorize sanctions against States which do not comply with its
rulings. The WTO mainly resolves disputes through the process of "consensus" and "arbitration"
which are essentially mechanisms of ADR.

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

The International Chamber of Commerce is an international organization that works to promote
and support global trade and globalisation. It serves as an advocate of world business in the
global economy, in the interests of economic growth, job creation, and prosperity. As a global
business organization, made up of member States, it helps the development of global outlooks on
business matters. ICC has direct access to national governments worldwide through its national
committees. ICC activities include Arbitration and Dispute resolution which is one of the most
prominent activities that it performs.

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) is the core legal
body within the United Nations system in the field of international trade law. UNCITRAL was
tasked by the General Assembly to further the progressive harmonization and unification of the
law of international trade. The UNCITRAL is a body of member and observer States under the
auspices of the United Nations. It drafted the UNCITRAL Model Law on International
 ADR 17
International Initiative Towards ADR

Commercial Arbitration in 1985. Agreements, which cite the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules,
may be bound to this form of dispute resolution. Legislation based on the UNCITRAL Model
Law on International Commercial Arbitration has been enacted in Australia, Azerbaijan,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bermuda, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, in China: Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, Macau Special Administrative Region; Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt,
Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Japan, Jordan,
Kenya, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malta, Mexico. New Zealand. Nigeria, Oman. Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand,
Tunisia, Ukraine, within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Scotland; in
Bermuda, overseas territory of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; within
the United States of America: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Oregon and Texas; Zambia, and
Zimbabwe.

Institute for the Study and Development of Legal Systems

ISDLS is a non-profit, non-governmental organization based in San Francisco, California.
U.S.A. The Institute conducts international legal reform and exchange projects in collaboration
with foreign governments and legal professionals and is comprised of approximately eighty
leading legal professionals in the State of California, including federal and State Judges,
prosecutors and public defenders; private civil and criminal attorneys; city attorneys; Court
administrators; private and Court-appointed mediators and arbitrators; law professors; directors
of judicial education and performance centers and committees; directors of law enforcement
oversight bodies; law enforcement officers and trainers; journalists and others."10

Other Treaties
The other treaties governing ADR in various States would include the United States Code Title
9, The Agreement relating to the Application of the European Convention on International
Arbitration (Paris, 1962), the European Convention providing a Uniform Law on Arbitration
(Council of Europe, 1964). The various other treaties enacted by the rest of the countries in the v
orld are not included in this list. The following organizational rules are the most common rules
which serve as model clauses for the parties—

10
hg.org, last accessed on 28 April, 2016.
 ADR 18
International Initiative Towards ADR

(i) ICC Rules of Arbitration and ICC Rules of Optional conciliation.

(ii) International Center for settlement of Investment Disputes model clauses.
(iii) WIPO's Arbitration and Mediation rules.
(iv) UNCITRAL Arbitration and Conciliation Rules.
(v) London Court of International Arbitration's model clauses for arbitration rules.
(vi) American Arbitration Association's model clauses for arbitration rules.
 ADR 19
International Initiative Towards ADR

CONCLUSION
ADR is the current global practice when it comes to resolving conflicts without one party
branding the other as 'enemy'. The necessity and utility of ADR is indisputable. The emergence
of alternative dispute resolution has been one of the most significant movements as a part of
conflict management and judicial reform, and it has become a global necessity.' In this global
world where there is market everywhere, there is a strong need to assess the present laws in
context of emerging ADR trends worldwide. It is equally important to analyze our available
methods in ADR in view of ADR systems at global level.

India is not the only country which is buffeted by arrears of Court cases. Even the developed
countries such as the United States of America and the United Kingdom suffer from this
problem, albeit on a lesser scale. The USA and, following its motivation, numerous countries,
including Australia, Canada, Germany, Holland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa,
Switzerland and the United Kingdom have been using over the last 30 years or so what is
universally known as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that persuaded the disputants to
arrive at a negotiated understanding with a smallest amount of outside help. ADR is now and on
the rise and time-honored tool of change in dispute management in American and European
business communities. Now ADR has become fashionable and attractive in USA, UK, Canada,
Hong Kong and Australia as it is effective, cost wise efficient and quick form of dispute
resolution. In the last two decades, ADR initiatives have mushroomed in developing and
developed countries alike.
 ADR 20
International Initiative Towards ADR

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS:
Alternative Dispute Resolution-What it is and how it works? - P.C. Rao and William Sheffield

Alternative Dispute Resolution - O.P. Motiwal

Alternative Dispute Resolution - Jayachandra Reddy

The Action Out of Court - Kleiner,

International Mediation—The UK Experience - Karl Mackie and Edward Lightburn

WEB-SOURCES:

http://www.hg.org