• Title/Summary/Keyword: 화해중재판정

Search Result 1, Processing Time 0.013 seconds

Study on the Need for Distinction Between "Award by Consent" and "Med-Arb" (중재절차 중 '화해의 유도'와 '조정-중재'제도의 구분 필요성에 대한 연구)

  • Do, Hyejeong
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.30 no.4
    • /
    • pp.51-70
    • /
    • 2020
  • The Mediation-Arbitration hybrid is becoming more popular since it makes an amicable relationship and thorough statement possible. The Mediation-Arbitration hybrid has been used to take advantage of both dispute resolution methods. In a Med-Arb process, negotiating a resolution to disputes is attempted with a mediator's help. If the mediation ends in an impasse or issues remain unresolved, parties can move on to arbitration. Med-Arb can also be cost-effective when disputants hire one person to serve as mediator and arbitrator (Med-Arb-Pure). However, it can disturb the fairness and neutrality of arbitrators, and awards can be annulled. Indeed, "Award by Consent" is different from the "Med-Arb-Pure" process. Arbitrators easily confuse them. Only the parties settle on the arbitral proceedings' course, and the arbitrator can help them (award by consent). The role and skill of a mediator are different from an arbitrator's. Disputants have the right to use a mediator who specializes in mediation. Moreover, mediation communication confidentiality is the essential value of mediation, and this should be protected. Therefore, in the process of "Med-Arb," separation between mediating and arbitrating is a better choice to specialize in each expertise. In this process, "Med-Arb" can be an affordable, expeditious, proper, and effective method of resolving international commercial disputes and continuing ADR prime time.