What are the pros and cons of challenges to the appointment of Essay

What are the pros and cons of challenges to the appointment of arbitrators - Essay Example Nevertheless, the solicitor takes the vital role of advising on all possible methods that can be applied in dispute resolution, prior to recommendation of relevant in a given situation. In this case, arbitration is an alternative for resolving disputes in a situation that a third party reaches a decision, which is binding upon the parties to the dispute. The arbitrator decides on the issue in concerning the dispute, and he or she enforces a binding decision on the parties. Therefore, arbitration is undertaken due to a certain business contract; hence, offering arbitration for is situations where the disputes arise. Moreover, arbitration is considered to be the best suited for facilitating a settlement between parties in dispute. The paper will focus on exploring pros and cons of challenges to the appointment of arbitrators in the perspectives of parties bringing the challenge, opposing party in the disputes and the arbitrator whose appointment is be. In the process of arbitration, th e parties involved in the dispute agree to submit their dispute to the neutral arbitrator, instead of a court. Therefore, the arbitrator acts like a judge, whereby he or she listens to the testimony, reviews evidence and enters a binding ruling. After the decision in made, the prevailing parties may deicide filing in court to convent the award to a judgment. 4. On the other hand, the prevailing party may be raise claims that the judgment, which was provided, and the process involved binding arbitration require enforcement through the courts. Pros of arbitration One of the pros of arbitration is being quicker compared to litigation, and this becomes a debatable topic with arbitration tending to similar to a formal process of the court5. Therefore, once the party bringing the challenge and the opposing party in the disputes enters into arbitration they do not have to wait for the Court to add them in to a list, which is over clouded6. The parties have a chance of acquiring a suitable arbitrator, who is available, and they are make to decide on the time of arbitration. On the other hand, the decision made during the arbitration is binding to the party bringing the challenge and the opposing party in the disputes. However, there are some of other forms of ADR, which are non-binding; hence, they facilitate failure of the arbitration, despite the cost. In this case, once the arbitration is submitted there are expectations of definitive results. Arbitration is considered faster and less formal compared to the Courts process since the appointments are planned in a way that establishes a mutual convenience among the party bringing the challenge, opposing party in the disputes and the arbitrator. However, in the courts situation, the plan is dictated by the Court calendar, hence, in arbitration there is a chance of deciding on the duration, time, which is to be spent by the arbitrator in their case7. The party bringing the challenge and the opposing party in the dispute s have a chance of appointing somebody who they are familiar with in a situation of a dispute. Therefore, the arbitrator relates the process of arbitration to an industry normal practice. The party bringing the challenge, opposing party in the disputes and the arbitrator are able to include the clause in contracts sue to the likelihood of reaming confidential, unlike the disputes in the courts. Therefore, arbitration facilitates maintenance of the business relationship between the party bringing the challenge and the opposing party in the disputes8. Given that arbitration can lead to a resolution of a dispute faster than litigation, it is considered less costly than litigation since the