What is the difference between direct and indirect arbitration?

The difference between direct and indirect arbitration is the way the process is conducted. In direct arbitration, a neutral third-party will resolve the dispute between two parties by hearing both sides of the dispute, assessing evidence, and then rendering a decision. This third-party is known as an arbitrator. The arbitration process is typically much faster than going through a court trial, and is often less expensive. In indirect arbitration, the two parties in the dispute agree to go through the arbitration process, but they are solely responsible for settling the dispute. This means that the two parties involved in the dispute will negotiate their own settlement terms and will not be required to go through a formal arbitration hearing. This type of arbitration is often used to resolve business disputes faster and more efficiently than waiting for a court ruling. In Kansas, both direct and indirect arbitration are allowed, though the rules governing each type of arbitration are different. Direct arbitration is governed by the Kansas Arbitration Rules, which provide guidance on the selection of arbitrators and other procedural matters. Indirect arbitration is governed by the Kansas Uniform Arbitration Act, which provides guidance on the arbitration process and the enforcement of awards.

Related FAQs

What is a joinder of parties in arbitration?
What is the effect of arbitral immunity?
What is a motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration?
Are there any remedies for a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing?
Are there any limits to attorney’s fees in arbitration?
What is a motion to modify or correct an arbitration award?
Are there any special considerations for international arbitration awards?
What is a Model International Commercial Arbitration clause?
What is a discovery issue in arbitration?
What is a mini-trial?

What is the difference between direct and indirect arbitration?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts