5
1
2024
1711615833137_3983
194-202
https://submissions.qlantic.com/index.php/qjssh/article/download/300/252
https://submissions.qlantic.com/index.php/qjssh/article/view/300
| Vol. 5, No. 1 (Winter 2024) |
|
|
|
| |
Original Research Article
Open Access | |
|
| The Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Pakistan's Legal System | |
| ||
Abstract: This article explores the transformative role of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Pakistan's legal system, focusing on mediation, arbitration, and conciliation. ADR proves pivotal in addressing challenges like case backlog offering efficient and accessible dispute resolution. Its cost-effectiveness and participant-driven nature make it inclusive. ADR's adaptability fosters creative solutions, particularly in family and community disputes, emphasizing relationship preservation. Despite challenges, ongoing initiatives aim to enhance awareness and overcome cultural barriers. Looking ahead, ADR's promising future in Pakistan is marked by legislative reforms and growing cultural acceptance, heralding a shift towards a more collaborative and efficient legal landscape. | ||
Key Words: ADR, ODR, Arbitration, Mediation, Dispute | ||
Introduction
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a set of processes designed to resolve legal conflicts outside the traditional courtroom setting. This approach offers an alternative to the adversarial system, promoting collaborative solutions to disputes. In modern legal systems, ADR has gained significance due to its efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility in delivering resolutions.
In the context of the legal landscape in Pakistan, the traditional adversarial system faces several challenges. The current system is marked by delays, backlog issues, and high costs associated with litigation. Court proceedings are often protracted, leading to frustration among litigants and hindering the timely delivery of justice. The overburdened judicial system struggles to cope with the volume of cases, contributing to prolonged wait times for resolution. Additionally, cultural and societal dynamics in Pakistan, emphasizing community values and relationships, pose unique challenges for the adversarial approach, which can strain interpersonal connections (Roberts& Palmer,2005).
Recognizing these challenges, there has been a growing acknowledgement of the need for alternative approaches to dispute resolution in Pakistan. The legal landscape is evolving, with increased emphasis on incorporating ADR mechanisms. This shift is driven by the desire for more efficient, accessible, and culturally sensitive methods of resolving disputes. ADR provides an avenue to address the limitations of the traditional system, offering a promising way forward in the pursuit of justice in Pakistan (Menkel-Meadow, C. 1996).
Historical Overview of ADR in Pakistan
The historical development of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms in Pakistan reflects a gradual evolution influenced by cultural, societal, and legal factors. While formal ADR structures have been more formally recognized in recent years, informal methods of dispute resolution have deep roots in the region.
In the pre-independence era, traditional methods of dispute resolution were prevalent in what is now Pakistan. These methods often involved community elders or tribal leaders who played a crucial role in resolving conflicts. Local customs and traditions shaped these early ADR practices. After gaining independence in 1947, Pakistan inherited a legal system with roots in British common law. The formal legal system primarily relied on adversarial processes, but informal methods continued to coexist. However, it's essential to note that the recognition and formalization of ADR mechanisms in Pakistan gained momentum in the latter part of the 20th century and continued into the 21st century (Barrett, J. T., & Barrett, J. 2004).
Cultural and Societal Factors Influencing ADR Acceptance
Pakistan has a strong tradition of community-centric values, where collective well-being is highly valued. ADR mechanisms align with these values by emphasizing collaborative solutions and community involvement. The majority of Pakistan's population follows Islamic principles, which encourage amicable dispute resolution and forgiveness. ADR methods, particularly mediation and reconciliation, resonate with Islamic teachings on conflict resolution. Traditional structures involving elders, panchayats (local councils), and influential community leaders have historically played a significant role in resolving disputes. These structures laid the groundwork for the acceptance of ADR principles in contemporary legal practices. ADR mechanisms are often seen as promoting social harmony and preserving relationships, values deeply embedded in Pakistani culture. Informal networks for dispute resolution have been a natural extension of these cultural norms. The formal recognition of ADR in Pakistan aligns with the historical acceptance of informal methods of conflict resolution. The gradual integration of ADR into the legal framework reflects an acknowledgement of its cultural compatibility and the need for more efficient and accessible dispute-resolution methods in Pakistan's evolving legal landscape (Gold, J. A. 2005).
Types of ADR in Pakistan
In Pakistan, various forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) have gained popularity as effective means of resolving disputes outside the traditional courtroom setting. Among the commonly used ADR methods are mediation, arbitration, and conciliation.
Mediation
Mediation involves a neutral third party, the mediator, who facilitates communication between conflicting parties to help them reach a mutually acceptable solution. Mediation is increasingly employed in Pakistan, addressing a range of disputes from family matters to commercial conflicts.
Example of Successful Mediation
In a family dispute over property inheritance in Lahore, the parties chose mediation. The skilled mediator helped them navigate complex emotions and legal intricacies, resulting in a mutually agreeable distribution of assets. This not only resolved the legal issues but also restored familial relationships.
Arbitration
Arbitration entails the submission of a dispute to a neutral third party, the arbitrator, who makes a binding decision after considering evidence and arguments from both sides. Arbitration is commonly used in Pakistan for commercial disputes, construction contracts, and international trade matters.
Example of Successful Arbitration
Two businesses in Karachi engaged in a contractual dispute and opted for arbitration. The arbitrator, well-versed in commercial matters, rendered a decision that both parties accepted. This expedited and cost-effective resolution was crucial for maintaining business relationships.
Conciliation
Conciliation involves a neutral third party, the conciliator, who facilitates discussions between conflicting parties and suggests potential solutions. Conciliation is utilized in various contexts, including labour disputes, contract disagreements, and interpersonal conflicts.
Example of Successful Conciliation
In a labour-management dispute in Faisalabad, a labour union and an employer opted for conciliation. The conciliator proposed compromise solutions, leading to an agreement that satisfied both parties. This prevented a potentially disruptive labour strike and maintained a harmonious work environment.
These examples illustrate the versatility and success of ADR methods in Pakistan, showcasing their effectiveness in addressing diverse disputes. The human-centric approach of skilled mediators, arbitrators, and conciliators, along with the flexibility of ADR processes, contributes to positive outcomes, often preserving relationships and avoiding the adversarial nature of traditional litigation (Won, S. K. 2013).
Legal Framework for ADR in Pakistan
The legal framework supporting Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Pakistan has evolved to provide a basis for the recognition and regulation of ADR processes. Various laws, rules, and regulations govern ADR, reflecting a commitment to making these methods integral to the legal system.
Arbitration Act, 1940
The Arbitration Act of 1940 is a foundational legislation governing domestic arbitration in Pakistan. It outlines procedures for the conduct of arbitration proceedings, the enforcement of arbitral awards, and the appointment of arbitrators (Arbitration Act, 1940).
Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act, 2011
This Act aligns with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. It facilitates the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration agreements and awards in Pakistan (Recognition and Enforcement Act, 2011).
Civil Procedure Code (CPC) Amendment for Mediation, 2020
Amendments to the Civil Procedure Code in 2020 introduced provisions promoting and regulating mediation in civil matters. It encourages parties to opt for mediation before or during court proceedings (CPC Punjab Amendment for Mediation, 2020).
Punjab Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2019
This legislation provides a comprehensive legal framework for alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including conciliation, in the province of Punjab. It outlines the process, powers of the conciliator, and the enforcement of settlement agreements (Punjab Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2019).
Sindh Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017
Similar to the Punjab Act, the Sindh Alternative Dispute Resolution Act governs ADR processes, including conciliation, in the province of Sindh (Sindh Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017).
Family Courts Act, 1964
The Family Courts Act establishes family courts with jurisdiction over matters related to marriage, divorce, maintenance, and child custody. It encourages the resolution of family disputes through mediation and conciliation (Family Courts Act, 1964).
International Arbitration Act, 2017
Enacted to provide a legal framework for the conduct of international commercial arbitration in Pakistan. It incorporates the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, facilitating international arbitration proceedings.
Challenges in the legal framework include the need for continuous awareness, consistency in application, and addressing emerging issues. Ongoing developments focus on training programs for ADR practitioners, awareness campaigns, and potential amendments to existing legislation to enhance the effectiveness of ADR mechanisms in Pakistan (International Arbitration Act, 2017).
Advantages of ADR in the Pakistani Context
In the Pakistani legal landscape, the efficiency and timeliness of dispute resolution are significant challenges within the traditional litigation system. Courts are often burdened with a backlog of cases, leading to prolonged wait times for litigants. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation and arbitration, offer a notable advantage by providing faster resolutions. ADR allows parties to set their own timelines, avoiding the delays associated with court schedules. This contributes to a more efficient legal system where disputes can be resolved in a timely manner.
One of the key benefits of ADR in Pakistan is its cost-effectiveness compared to traditional litigation. Legal proceedings can incur substantial expenses, making access to justice challenging for many individuals and businesses. ADR processes, with their streamlined procedures and reduced formalities, often result in lower legal costs. This makes ADR more accessible to a diverse range of people, fostering a system where financial barriers are minimized and justice is more inclusive.
ADR methods, including mediation and arbitration, offer a level of flexibility and customization that is often lacking in traditional litigation. In Pakistan, where disputes vary widely in nature and complexity, ADR allows parties to tailor solutions to their specific needs. This flexibility enables creative problem-solving and promotes outcomes that are mutually agreeable to the parties involved. The ability to choose the most suitable ADR process adds an empowering element, emphasizing a more participant-driven approach to dispute resolution.
The preservation of relationships is a crucial aspect of dispute resolution in the Pakistani context, where societal values emphasize community harmony. Traditional litigation can strain interpersonal connections due to its adversarial nature. ADR methods, by contrast, prioritize open communication and collaboration. Mediation, for example, fosters dialogue and understanding, leading to resolutions that often preserve relationships. This is particularly significant in family disputes and community conflicts, where maintaining social harmony is highly valued.
The advantages of ADR in Pakistan lie in its ability to provide efficient, cost-effective, and flexible dispute resolution, addressing the specific challenges posed by the traditional litigation system. ADR contributes to a legal framework that is more accessible, timely, and aligned with the cultural and societal values of the Pakistani context (Awais, H., & Munir, M. A. 2018, May).
Challenges and Criticisms
Implementing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Pakistan encounters challenges and criticisms deeply rooted in cultural, institutional, and systemic factors. These issues, if unaddressed, can impede the widespread adoption of ADR in the country (Goldberg & Sander, F. E. 1985).
Limited Awareness and Education pose a significant hurdle to ADR acceptance in Pakistan. Both legal professionals and the general public may lack awareness of ADR processes, hindering its consideration as a viable option for dispute resolution.
Resistance to Change is another substantial challenge. Entrenched cultural and institutional norms in favour of traditional litigation can result in scepticism and reluctance to embrace ADR methods. The preference for familiar, adversarial approaches may resist the shift towards more collaborative and informal dispute resolution mechanisms.
Unequal Access to ADR can be a concern, particularly in rural areas or among marginalized communities. If ADR processes are not equally accessible to all, there is a risk of excluding certain segments of the population, limiting the inclusivity of the justice system.
The Lack of Standardization is a challenge affecting the consistency and reliability of ADR outcomes. The absence of standardized practices and regulations across different regions and institutions may impact the quality of ADR processes.
Limited Enforcement Mechanisms for ADR decisions can be perceived as weaker compared to court judgments. Concerns about the enforceability of ADR decisions may undermine confidence in the process and discourage its use.
Cultural scepticism arises from Pakistan's traditional cultural values, which may emphasize formal legal proceedings over informal methods. Some individuals may view ADR as less credible or authoritative, questioning its ability to provide fair and just resolutions.
The Availability of Qualified ADR Professionals may be limited, posing a challenge to the successful implementation of ADR. The shortage of qualified mediators, arbitrators, and conciliators may undermine the effectiveness of ADR processes.
Cultural Sensitivity in ADR Procedures is crucial, but it presents a challenge that needs to be addressed. ADR methods should be adapted to be culturally sensitive and responsive to the diverse cultural norms in Pakistan to gain acceptance.
Perceived Lack of Formality is a concern for some stakeholders who may view ADR as lacking the formality and rigour of court proceedings. This perception might affect the credibility of ADR decisions, particularly in cases involving complex legal issues.
Overemphasis on Traditional Litigation within the legal education system and legal culture may hinder the development and acceptance of ADR skills among legal professionals. Shifting the focus towards ADR may require a paradigm shift in legal education.
Comparison with Traditional Litigation
In comparing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with traditional litigation, several factors highlight the advantages and disadvantages of each approach.
Advantages of ADR
ADR processes, such as mediation and arbitration, are known for their efficiency, offering a faster resolution compared to the protracted timelines often associated with traditional litigation. Quick dispute resolution is particularly valuable in situations where time is of the essence.
ADR tends to be more cost-effective than traditional litigation. The streamlined procedures and reduced formalities often result in lower legal costs, making ADR more accessible to a broader range of individuals and businesses.
ADR provides a level of flexibility and customization that is often lacking in traditional litigation. Parties have the freedom to tailor solutions to their specific needs, fostering creative and mutually agreeable resolutions.
A significant advantage of ADR is its emphasis on preserving relationships. Methods like mediation focus on open communication and collaboration, contributing to resolutions that can maintain interpersonal connections, which might be strained in adversarial litigation (Mnookin, R. H. 1998).
Disadvantages of ADR
While ADR decisions are generally binding, enforcement mechanisms may be perceived as weaker compared to court judgments. This could potentially undermine confidence in the process, particularly if one party is reluctant to comply with the decision.
In certain situations, ADR may not be equally accessible to all parties, especially in rural areas or among marginalized communities. This could result in excluding certain segments of the population from the benefits of ADR.
The lack of standardized practices across different regions and institutions may impact the consistency and reliability of ADR outcomes. This variation could affect the quality of ADR processes (Chaturvedi, N. 2021).
Situations Where ADR Might Be More Suitable and Effective
In business-related conflicts, where preserving ongoing relationships is crucial, ADR methods like arbitration can offer efficient and confidential resolutions, often preferred over public court proceedings.
ADR, particularly mediation, is well-suited for family disputes involving issues such as divorce, child custody, and inheritance. The emphasis on open communication can contribute to more amicable resolutions.
ADR processes like mediation and conciliation are effective in resolving workplace conflicts and employment disputes. These methods can be less adversarial and help maintain a positive working environment.
For conflicts within communities or among neighbours, community-based mediation can be effective. ADR allows for local cultural understanding and involvement, fostering community harmony.
In cases involving intricate commercial contracts, arbitration can be a preferred method. It allows parties to choose expert arbitrators with specific knowledge relevant to the industry, ensuring a nuanced understanding of the issues at hand.
In summary, the choice between ADR and traditional litigation depends on the nature of the dispute and the desired outcomes. While ADR offers efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility, traditional litigation may be necessary for certain situations requiring the formal legal processes provided by courts.
Public Awareness and Education
The awareness and understanding of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) among the public and legal professionals in Pakistan show variations that underscore the need for increased education and outreach.
Limited awareness regarding ADR processes is prevalent among the public in Pakistan. For many individuals, the intricacies and advantages of mediation, arbitration, and other ADR methods remain unfamiliar. There is a need to bridge this knowledge gap to empower individuals to make informed decisions about dispute resolution.
Cultural perceptions play a significant role in shaping public awareness. Some individuals may view traditional legal processes as more authoritative, contributing to scepticism about the effectiveness of ADR. This cultural influence highlights the importance of culturally sensitive education on ADR.
Legal Professionals
The understanding of ADR among legal professionals varies. While some practitioners are well-versed in ADR methods and actively incorporate them into their practice, others may have a limited appreciation for the nuances of these processes. This diversity in understanding calls for targeted educational efforts within the legal community (Ali, M., & Geng, L. L.2019).
To address these challenges and enhance awareness and education about ADR mechanisms in Pakistan, the following strategies can be considered:
Educational Workshops and Seminars
Conducting educational workshops and seminars aimed at both the public and legal professionals can provide valuable insights into ADR processes. These sessions should focus on demystifying ADR, explaining its benefits, and offering real-world examples to enhance understanding.
Integration into Legal Education
Incorporating ADR education into the curriculum of law schools can ensure that the next generation of legal professionals is well-versed in these methods. Practical training sessions and case studies can be particularly effective in preparing law students for the diverse landscape of dispute resolution.
Awareness Campaigns
Launching targeted awareness campaigns through various media channels can reach a broader audience. These campaigns should emphasize the advantages of ADR, dispel misconceptions, and encourage individuals to consider alternative methods for dispute resolution.
Collaboration with Bar Associations
Collaborating with bar associations and legal professional bodies can facilitate the dissemination of information about ADR. Training programs, seminars, and conferences organized in partnership with these organizations can effectively reach legal practitioners.
Community Engagement Programs
Engaging with local communities through community-based programs can address cultural perceptions and build trust in ADR processes. These programs should be tailored to the specific cultural context, emphasizing the compatibility of ADR with local values.
Online Resources and Platforms
Creating user-friendly online resources, including informational videos, articles, and interactive platforms, can serve as accessible tools for individuals seeking to understand ADR. These resources should be available in multiple languages to cater to diverse audiences (Kaya, S., & Khan, 2022).
A multi-faceted approach that combines educational initiatives, community engagement, and collaboration with legal professionals is essential for improving awareness and understanding of ADR in Pakistan. By addressing cultural perceptions and knowledge gaps, these strategies can contribute to a more informed and receptive approach to alternative dispute resolution (Shah, 2004).
The Future of ADR in Pakistan
Looking ahead, the future of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Pakistan holds promising prospects as the legal landscape evolves to meet the demands of a dynamic society. There is a growing recognition of the need for efficient, accessible, and culturally sensitive dispute resolution mechanisms, and ADR is positioned to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of the legal system.
Within this context, ongoing initiatives and proposed reforms are paving the way for enhanced ADR mechanisms. Various stakeholders, including legal practitioners, policymakers, and civil society, are actively involved in shaping the trajectory of ADR in the country (Goldberg & Sander, F. E. 1985).
In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on integrating ADR into the formal legal system. Amendments to the Civil Procedure Code and the introduction of specific mediation rules in provinces like Punjab are indicative of a commitment to incorporating ADR practices into the mainstream legal framework. These reforms are not only creating a legal basis for ADR but also signalling a cultural shift towards embracing collaborative and non-adversarial approaches to dispute resolution (Lee, 2016).
Moreover, educational initiatives are playing a crucial role in building awareness and understanding of ADR. Legal professionals are receiving training on ADR methods, and law schools are incorporating ADR into their curricula. These efforts are aimed at preparing a new generation of legal practitioners who are well-versed in the diverse tools offered by ADR. Community-based ADR initiatives are gaining traction, recognizing the importance of tailoring dispute resolution mechanisms to local cultural norms. By engaging with communities and promoting ADR as a culturally compatible option, these initiatives aim to foster trust and acceptance of ADR practices. Looking forward, the ongoing commitment to ADR is likely to result in further legislative developments, establishing a more robust legal framework for ADR in Pakistan. Efforts to address challenges such as enforcement mechanisms, standardization, and accessibility are expected to be focal points for reform (Sander, 2000).
The future of ADR in Pakistan is characterized by a positive trajectory marked by legislative reforms, educational initiatives, and community engagement. As ADR becomes more deeply ingrained in the legal culture of the country, it is poised to offer efficient, accessible, and culturally sensitive solutions to a diverse range of disputes, contributing to a more responsive and inclusive justice system (Stipanowich, 2004).
Conclusion
In summary, the exploration of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the context of Pakistan reveals a landscape undergoing transformative changes. ADR, encompassing methods such as mediation, arbitration, and conciliation, emerges as a crucial player in reshaping the traditional legal paradigm. Several key points underscore the significance of ADR in the Pakistani legal system.
Firstly, ADR presents a compelling alternative to traditional litigation by offering efficiency and timeliness. The expedited resolution of disputes through ADR processes, in contrast to the often prolonged court proceedings, addresses the critical issue of case backlog and ensures quicker access to justice. Secondly, the cost-effectiveness of ADR stands out as a pivotal factor. Its streamlined procedures and reduced formalities not only make dispute resolution more financially accessible for individuals and businesses but also contribute to a more inclusive legal system. Flexibility and customization further distinguish ADR, allowing parties to tailor solutions to their specific needs. This adaptability fosters creative and mutually agreeable resolutions, promoting a more participant-driven approach to dispute resolution.
Preserving relationships emerges as a noteworthy advantage of ADR, especially in family and community-related disputes. The emphasis on open communication and collaboration contributes to outcomes that not only address legal complexities but also maintain social harmony. Despite these merits, challenges such as limited awareness, cultural perceptions, and unequal access persist. To overcome these challenges, ongoing initiatives focus on educational workshops, integration into legal education, awareness campaigns, and community engagement. Looking forward, the future of ADR in Pakistan holds promise. Legislative reforms, community-based initiatives, and a growing recognition of ADR's cultural compatibility signify a positive trajectory. As ADR becomes more deeply ingrained in the legal culture, it is poised to contribute significantly to a more efficient, accessible, and inclusive legal system in Pakistan. The ongoing commitment to ADR reflects a broader shift towards collaborative and non-adversarial approaches, marking a transformative phase in the country's legal landscape.
References
Ali, M., & Geng, L. L. (2019). Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Pakistan: The role of lawyers in mediation procedure. International Journal of Research, 6(04), 421-430. https://journals.pen2print.org/index.php/ijr/
Arbitration Act 1940 Pakistan.
Awais, H., & Munir, M. A. (2018, May). Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Trial Courts of Pakistan: A Practical Approach Towards New Era of Timely Justice as a Means of 'Justice for All'. In Report of 8th Judicial Conference, Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan (2018), Forthcoming.
Barrett, J. T., & Barrett, J. P. (2004). A history of alternative dispute resolution : the story of a political, cultural, and social movement. Jossey-Bass.
Chaturvedi, N. (2021). Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR): Advantages & Disadvantages. Jus Corpus LJ, 2, 766.
Gold, J. A. (2005). ADR through a cultural lens: How cultural values shape our disputing processes. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 2005(2), 1-33. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1493&context=jdr
Goldberg, S. B., Green, E. D., & Sander, F. E. (1985). ADR problems and prospects: Looking to the future. Judicature, 69, 291. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/judica69&div=69&id=&page=
International Arbitration Act, 2017.
Kaya, S., & Khan, M. D. (2022). Online dispute resolution in Pakistan: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 7(2), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp103-119
Lee, C. K., Yiu, T. W., & Cheung, S. O. (2016). Selection and use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in construction projects — Past and future research. International Journal of Project Management, 34(3), 494-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.12.008
Menkel-Meadow, C. (1996). Introduction: What Will We Do When Adjudication Ends: A Brief Intellectual History of ADR. UCLA L. Rev., 44, 1613. https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1765
Mnookin, R. H. (1998). Alternative dispute resolution (p. 2). Harvard Law School.
Punjab Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2019.
Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act, 2011.
Roberts, S., & Palmer, M. (2005). Dispute processes: ADR and the primary forms of decision-making. Cambridge University Press.
Shah, A. (2004). Using ADR to resolve online disputes. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology, 10(3), 25. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol10/iss3/3
Sindh Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017.
Stipanowich, T. J. (2004). ADR and the “Vanishing trial”: The growth and impact of “Alternative dispute resolution”. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 1(3), 843-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00025.x
Won, S. K. (2013). Overview of alternate dispute resolution with special reference to arbitration laws in Pakistan. Journal of Arbitration Studies, 23(3), 149-167. https://doi.org/10.16998/jas.2013.23.3.149
1 Lecturer, Department of Law, International Institute of Science, Arts and Technology, Gujranwala, Punjab, Pakistan.
2 Lecturer, Department of Law, International Institute of Science, Arts and Technology, Gujranwala, Punjab, Pakistan.
3 LLM, Advocate High Court, Pakistan.
|
|
| Id | Article Title | Authors | Vol Info | Year |
| Id | Article Title | Authors | Vol Info | Year |