Muhammed Awais
D2- Evaluating Alternative Dispute Resolution
In this report, I will talk about two different Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods along with the
benefits and disadvantages of using the methods. I will also compare the methods to the court which is the civil
court.
Tribunal
A tribunal is somewhere where people can go to get help, this is an alternative to going to court. This is much
cheaper than the courts. At a tribunal hearing there will be three members in a panel which will sit together. The
leader of the panel will be the chair person and either side of the chair person will be two wings which will help
and guide the chair person. They hear the evidence from the witnesses and decide on the verdict, which will be
binding for both parties to follow.
The first advantage of using an Alternative Dispute Resolution method which is Tribunal is that they have the
expertise to deal with the cases which come into the tribunal. The chairperson is usually a qualified judge or
lawyer so they will have information about the law and they will be updated with any new laws which have
come into the law. Also, the two- lay people which will sit next to the chair person will also have expertise on
the matter, this is good so that they won’t be new to the problem as they may have already dealt with the
problem themselves or they may know risk of the problem and they may want to help them out. As they feel
they have the expertise to help the both parties as they have seen the problem occur. For example, in an
employment tribunal the judge or chairperson will be an experienced lawyer in this matter as they have past
where they have dealt with such problem. The two-lay people will have something to do with the subject as that
is the only reason of why they are there. For example, one of them can be an employer and the other can be a
representative of a trade union. In the civil court, there is a lack of technological knowledge, so therefore we
need tribunals as they will have better understanding of the matter which they are dealing with. For example, the
First-Tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability they are made so that they can deal with appeals
which are against local authorities as the people are not impressed with the decision they had made on the
special educational needs of the person. This can include a refusal as well which will assess and look at the
special needs of the child, they will make a statement about the special educational needs for the child and they
do many other stuff along the same line. On the other hand, this tribunal will also deal with appeals against the
refusal of people under the age of 18 in prison. This can include and EHC assessment and will look for a place
for education after they will leave the custody. They will also deal with appeals against the discrimination by a
school of a disability of the child.
https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-special-educational-needs-and-disability
The second advantage of using tribunals to settle a case is that they give reasons for the decisions which they
will make. This is better and not like the courts because in a court when the judge makes his decision he will
say why he has made his decision but in the tribunal, they will explain why they made such decision and if there
are any circumstances for the decision they have come to. This will allow for the people in the tribunal why
they are the guilty party, this is better off for them to be found liable in the tribunal, because in the court they
may need to pay for the winning parties court fees. These can be very expensive to pay off. The decision which
must be made shouldn’t be based around anything other than a legal background. They shouldn’t make their
decision by looking at the past of the defendant and they should just really be looking at what was given in front
of them this could be the evidence or if there were any flaws which were made by the witnesses. As well as
giving reasons for the choice which they had made they will also need to provide a remedy and both parties
must agree with the remedy. A case example is the Bobby Tyson case which is about a young boy which had an
behaviour disorder ADHD. This disorder made the teachers at his school discriminate with him by not allowing
for him to go on trips with them. The teachers disallowed for Bobby to come to an end of term disco, they didn’t
allow for him to go on a theatre trip and lastly, they didn’t allow for him to participate in any annual class
photos which the school take of students each year. The school was found guilty and they apologised to bobby
for not treating him as they would treat other students. The young boy wasn’t allowed to see the lion king and
therefore the mother appealed to the tribunal so that she can get her voice heard. The decision which the judge
made was that the school should have a written apology letter which will need to be sent to bobby and his
mother and the school will need to have lessons so that they can treat disabled people with more respect. The
mother of bobby said, “I believe he made a real effort and he was terribly disappointed when he was told he
D2- Evaluating Alternative Dispute Resolution
In this report, I will talk about two different Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods along with the
benefits and disadvantages of using the methods. I will also compare the methods to the court which is the civil
court.
Tribunal
A tribunal is somewhere where people can go to get help, this is an alternative to going to court. This is much
cheaper than the courts. At a tribunal hearing there will be three members in a panel which will sit together. The
leader of the panel will be the chair person and either side of the chair person will be two wings which will help
and guide the chair person. They hear the evidence from the witnesses and decide on the verdict, which will be
binding for both parties to follow.
The first advantage of using an Alternative Dispute Resolution method which is Tribunal is that they have the
expertise to deal with the cases which come into the tribunal. The chairperson is usually a qualified judge or
lawyer so they will have information about the law and they will be updated with any new laws which have
come into the law. Also, the two- lay people which will sit next to the chair person will also have expertise on
the matter, this is good so that they won’t be new to the problem as they may have already dealt with the
problem themselves or they may know risk of the problem and they may want to help them out. As they feel
they have the expertise to help the both parties as they have seen the problem occur. For example, in an
employment tribunal the judge or chairperson will be an experienced lawyer in this matter as they have past
where they have dealt with such problem. The two-lay people will have something to do with the subject as that
is the only reason of why they are there. For example, one of them can be an employer and the other can be a
representative of a trade union. In the civil court, there is a lack of technological knowledge, so therefore we
need tribunals as they will have better understanding of the matter which they are dealing with. For example, the
First-Tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability they are made so that they can deal with appeals
which are against local authorities as the people are not impressed with the decision they had made on the
special educational needs of the person. This can include a refusal as well which will assess and look at the
special needs of the child, they will make a statement about the special educational needs for the child and they
do many other stuff along the same line. On the other hand, this tribunal will also deal with appeals against the
refusal of people under the age of 18 in prison. This can include and EHC assessment and will look for a place
for education after they will leave the custody. They will also deal with appeals against the discrimination by a
school of a disability of the child.
https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-special-educational-needs-and-disability
The second advantage of using tribunals to settle a case is that they give reasons for the decisions which they
will make. This is better and not like the courts because in a court when the judge makes his decision he will
say why he has made his decision but in the tribunal, they will explain why they made such decision and if there
are any circumstances for the decision they have come to. This will allow for the people in the tribunal why
they are the guilty party, this is better off for them to be found liable in the tribunal, because in the court they
may need to pay for the winning parties court fees. These can be very expensive to pay off. The decision which
must be made shouldn’t be based around anything other than a legal background. They shouldn’t make their
decision by looking at the past of the defendant and they should just really be looking at what was given in front
of them this could be the evidence or if there were any flaws which were made by the witnesses. As well as
giving reasons for the choice which they had made they will also need to provide a remedy and both parties
must agree with the remedy. A case example is the Bobby Tyson case which is about a young boy which had an
behaviour disorder ADHD. This disorder made the teachers at his school discriminate with him by not allowing
for him to go on trips with them. The teachers disallowed for Bobby to come to an end of term disco, they didn’t
allow for him to go on a theatre trip and lastly, they didn’t allow for him to participate in any annual class
photos which the school take of students each year. The school was found guilty and they apologised to bobby
for not treating him as they would treat other students. The young boy wasn’t allowed to see the lion king and
therefore the mother appealed to the tribunal so that she can get her voice heard. The decision which the judge
made was that the school should have a written apology letter which will need to be sent to bobby and his
mother and the school will need to have lessons so that they can treat disabled people with more respect. The
mother of bobby said, “I believe he made a real effort and he was terribly disappointed when he was told he
