Litigation v. Mediation - Essay Example

MEDIATION VS. LITIGATION AND THE ADVANTAGES OF MEDIATION Introduction A business dispute is a form of legal dispute,where there is a disagreement regarding the existence of the legal rights, duty; or the level of , or the kind of reimbursement, with regard to a claim by the injured party – due to the failure in honoring the duty or the rights in question. In this case, legal action is the move to enforce the rights in question, to get the compensation to be met, or for the retribution of the injured party.

Some of the legal action modes that may be taken include: mediation or litigation.Litigation, may take the form of a lawsuit, case, or controversy – which is a contest authorized by the provisions of law, and at a court of justice – which is aimed at the realization or the pursuit of enforcing the breached rights or the expected parts of the deal in question. The participants in such a case are the plaintiff and the defendant – who within the subject of the lawsuit are referred to, as the litigants.

Mediation on the other hand, is an ‘alternative dispute resolution’ model, which is used to complement or substitute other modes – as a way of assisting the disputants reach an agreement, through the creation of improved dialogue between them. In such a case, the parties involved are to consider the mediation process – as resolving the dispute to their mutual advantage – besides facilitation by an impartial mediator.Considering that the dispute is of a business nature, it is conclusive that the right or the duty to be enforced must have some financial value – as well as a time-span within which its value may be perceived.

Therefore, in the case the legal pursuit is to extend to the level – which the value of the legal practice or pursuit exceeds the value of the breached agreement; then from a business perspective, the pursuit will not be logical or rational. On the basis of this argument, mediation as opposed to litigation is a better option; as it will require less time and cost incurrence.The advantages that Alexander is likely to enjoy, in the case he chooses to take mediation instead of litigation include the following: A timely resolution of the dispute, which is basically – because the neutral and experienced third-party will push for increased dialogue between the disputants, from which better understanding of the dispute premises will be established, therefore making the case easier to resolve.

In this regard, the better understanding as well as the pursuit for voluntary agreement and mutual advantage will enable the disputants to arrive at the solution to the case faster. Also, mediation will directly – mean that the costs to be involved in the legal practices of litigation will be avoided; therefore the costs of such practices will not have to be borne by either parties/ the disputants. In this case, Alexander will reap the benefit that, mediation will help him save the amount, that he would have used throughout the litigation process, which also takes longer time for resolution (Simkin 57).

The confidentiality and the privacy of the issues and the parties to the dispute is another advantage that Alexander will benefit from. This is the case, as the resolution of the dispute outside the court and other formal lines of dispute resolution – will mean that Alexander will make less formal appearances. As a result, he is likely not to have his business profile tarnished by the conditions surrounding the dispute, especially in the eyes of his clients and potential business partners. By using mediation to resolve the dispute – will also directly mean that Alexander and the other disputant are likely to reach a mutual agreement; therefore keep the business relationship they had built, as opposed to breaking it after the enforcement through litigation.

Considering this, Alexander may continue to have the disputant as a business partner, therefore not suffer the fate of losing a business partner.In opting to use mediation, Alexander will have the advantage of not having to face the court-backlogs, which often result to a lengthy waiting – for the time to appear in court, as well as that, he will not be required to make numberless appearances to the court – which will be the case, if he takes the litigation option. Due to the informal nature of the mediation process, Alexander will also benefit from not going through the intimidating process involved in litigation.

Alexander will also benefit from – not being cross examined by the courts over and over again, during the determination of the premises of the case and the grounds for the resolution. In choosing mediation, Alexander will also be in a position to directly or indirectly control the resolution process, and the outcome thereof (Simkin 47- 52). During the mediation process, Alexander and the other disputant will also have the opportunity to redefine and express their interests; therefore the two will be in a position to compromise on certain issues, which may contribute to a harmonious resolution of the case.

Through choosing the mediation process, Alexander will also benefit from – the reduced or limited compromising of the legal rights of the two, as the litigation process will call for more legal rights compromising, especially during the establishment of the dispute premises (Simkin 52).ConclusionIn conclusion, it is evident that mediation – as opposed to the option of litigation will be faster, less expensive as well as much more favorable – therefore, Alexander is likely to benefit more from taking the option of mediation.

Also, considering that the business relationship may be maintained – is indicative that Alexander will benefit from the mediation alternative. Work CitedSimkin, William. Mediation and the Dynamics of Collective Bargaining. Washington DC: Bna Books; 2 Sub edition, (October 1986): 47-67.