Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The case about arbitration
The case about arbitration
Essays on arbitration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The case about arbitration
This report is set to outline and highlight key developments in a very important piece of law “Federal Arbitration Act” which is also commonly known as FAA. In order to look at the FAA in detail which was developed in late 1925, first let’s see what the word Arbitration mean. In simple words, Arbitration is known be to a very informal, private and isolated process in which all participating parties agree to hand in their disputes and problems in writing to one or more independent parties who are sanctioned to resolve the problem or issue. If someone ask you a question to define the act of Arbitration or what does it mean, most of us will have one of the following opinion:
• It is a system which helps private lawsuit ascending for various kind of business disagreements.
• A simple instrument remove or improve workplace tensions between the management or the employer and their employees.
• It is also known as a process by which big financial institutions (banks, Insurance companies) and different stock brokers protect themselves from harsh client grievances.
• A way to equal the playing field in decisive marketable disagreements among different multi-national organisations who are operating in different part of the world (Blankley, 2005).
As mentioned above briefly that FAA was initially developed in 1925, but until 1959 it has only been use in five cases, which was a big surprise to most of the lawmen. All the people who were familiar with the act projected that it would be a big success and FAA would be used on regular basis. However, in the later part of twentieth century there were various Supreme Court verdicts which were later changed from “quaint . . . procedural statute” into a “national regulatory statute”. In simpler te...
... middle of paper ...
...nancial. However, as set out by the Court in Allied-Bruce and Southland Corp the FAA confines the level to which any given state court and statue can circumvent the specified purpose of the Act and limit the rights of involved parties who have arrived into arbitration arrangements (Hayford, 2000).
To conclude, FAA is an intensive set of status which has been used in US and in many other countries over last few decades. It did have a fair amount of criticism when it was being developed and used back in 1930s. But over the span of last few years FAA has helped many business and organisations to reach to an agreeable arrangement not just on a national level but on a global level. More and more businesses are considering using FAA whenever they have dispute with their competitors or partners. FAA is a significant piece of legislation and it has been working very well.
...the previous Act. The last Act is the FISA Act of 2008 “The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act”, which allows intelligence professionals to monitor terrorist communications, while protecting civil liberties of Americans, more quickly and efficiently. (USDOJ) These legal changes have allowed not only the investigation and prosecution of terrorists to be more proficient, but it has also help change the structure of the operations of agencies to enhance counter-terrorism efforts.
Macintyre, S. (1987), Holt and the Establishment of Arbitration: An Australian Perspective, New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, 12(3): 151-159.
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
Federal Trade Commission - regulatory agency that helped businesses determine whether their behavior and actions would be acceptable to the government; it investigated corporate behavior and gave more power to the government regulations
The Freedom of Information Act is used mostly to pry open government files. It was designed to help individuals obtain information about the actions of government. The law proclaims that any citizen is to be given access to government records unless the disclosure involves litigation, the CIA, personal m...
United States of America. U.S. Supreme Court. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, 1 Apr. 2003. 13 Nov. 2013
Does the Federal Accountability Act ensure the proper use of taxpayers money and blind trust funds? The Federal Accountability (FAA) Act became law in 2006 and is not effective. This due to the Senate Scandal in 2012. Even after this scandal, no further amendments were made to the Act. Where then is the transparency in the government? Can we really trust our government with taxpayers money? Where is that money going? The largest part of this problem seems to originate from the Senate Scandal.
Shortly after World War I, the U.S. Government discovered the abilities of the modern airplane and created the idea of utilizing aircraft to transport mail across the country. In 1917, Congress approved funding to experiment with the idea of delivering mail by air. By 1920, the Post Office was delivering mail across the entire country, eliminating over 22 hours in delivery times of a coast-to-coast route. With the success of the airmail service and the growing popularity of civil aviation, the U.S. Government recognized the need to develop set standards for civil aviation and in 1926 created the Air Commerce Act of 1926. The Air Commerce Act of 1926 called for the government to regulate air routes, navigation systems, pilot and aircraft licensing and investigation of accidents. The act also controlled how airlines were compensated for mail delivery. Later in 1930, Postmaster General Walter Brown made recommendations which were later known as the Watres Act which consolidated airmail routes and opened the door for longer-term contracts with the airlines. Brown handled the situation regarding new contracts poorly by only inviting a hand selected list of large airlines to the negotiation table. This move pushed smaller airlines to complain and the issue was pushed to Congress. Following congressional hearings President Roosevelt later decided Brown’s scandal was too much to deal with and canceled all mail contracts completely and handed over air mail delivery responsibility to the U.S. Army. That decision was a disaster, and one month later, air mail was handed back over to the private sector. This time, however contract bidding was more structured and fair to all. It was then clear that the airline industry was back in full swing...
...ential for the worker to use confrontation at the appropriate time and to initiate a confrontation carefully. The overall goal is to have the confrontation be successful and have meaningful results.
ADR holds an extensive, easily influenced and diverging choice of processes for finding solutions to disputes which are personified by structured negotiation and consensus. It is regarded that arbitration is a familiar ADR technique, however, it is more of an official adjudicative and adversary technique initially a confidential litigation process which has more commonality to litigation than the more original consensual processes which symbolise ADR. As simplified by Angyal (Alternative Dispute Resolution, 1987, p. 11). "The key difference between ADR and those traditional techniques of litigation and arbitration is that ADR techniques are used to produce a resolution to dispute through a negotiated agreement while litigation and arbitration are processes by which a result is imposed on the parties. " We can say that many issues arise with terms.
system. Currently, there is a nascent movement to exclude certain types of disputes from ADR by amending the federal law
An arbitrator’s function is usually to interpret the collective bargaining agreement between the parties, not to apply his or her standards of what is right in a given situation. The courts have sought to compel labour and management to a peaceful resolution of grievances through arbitration. The Supreme Court has given support to the arbitration process in a series of decisions, and judicial deferral to arbitration has become a basic tenet of national labour policy. Bibliography Byars, L. L. (1997). The.
In the world of commerce, employment, and other social relations, businesses and individuals strive to choose either arbitration or mediation (conciliation). There are situations when parties submit their cases to arbitration bodies for mediation and, vice versa, when mediators are requested to resolve the dispute through the arbitration award. The arbitration and mediation traditions vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but their general ideas still remain similar. However, while a mediator in a single process possesses no entitled authority to render an award, an arbitrator is vested with more procedural powers and can execute a mediator’s functions. Furthermore, despite the flexibility of arbitration and mediation procedures, as well
Gies, T. P., & Bagley, A. W. (2013). Mandatory arbitration of employment disputes: What's new and what's next?. Employee Relations Law Journal, 39(3), 22-33.
It is argued that the key factor in ADR application is that all it’s’ method are designed to assist the disputing parties resolve their differences in a manner that is creative and most suited to the particular dispute. Yet these achievements are not sweeping enough to conclude that the adversarial procedures are irrelevant. Though some people see ADR methods as supplanting the adversarial system, but these thoughts could only hold water where the courts in many jurisdictions are unable to resolve all disputes in a manner appealing to litigants, but until then ADR methods will be designated as collaborative dispute resolution system with the conventional litigation system.