How does mediation differ from arbitration?

Mediation and arbitration are both forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), meaning they aim to resolve disputes outside of court. However, there are some key differences that set them apart. In mediation, the mediator’s role is to help facilitate an agreement between the two parties. The mediator is typically a neutral third-party facilitator who helps the parties come to a consensus. The parties have more control over the outcome of their dispute as they are able to negotiate and craft their own resolution. The mediator may provide some legal advice or suggest possible settlements, however the parties are ultimately responsible for coming to a resolution. In contrast, arbitration is a more formal process in which the arbitrator acts as a quasi-judge. They have the authority to review evidence presented by the parties and then make a binding decision. The arbitrator acts as a judge in that they are responsible for their ruling and will not compromise with the parties. In Alaska, the law requires that, in most cases, both sides must agree to have their dispute resolved through arbitration. Overall, while arbitration and mediation both offer ways to resolve disputes without going to court, there are significant differences in terms of their process and the roles taken by the facilitator.

Related FAQs

Are there any restrictions on the topics that can be discussed in mediation?
What are the consequences if the parties do not comply with the mediated agreement?
Is there a difference between mediation and conciliation?
How is a mediator chosen for a case?
What types of agreements can be reached through mediation?
Is mediation confidential?
How is mediation used in alternative dispute resolution?
How can I make sure that I am getting a fair outcome in mediation?
Are there any risks of using mediation?
How can parties ensure their interests are respected during mediation?

How does mediation differ from arbitration?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts