NCJ Number
149604
Journal
Judicature Volume: 77 Issue: 4 Dated: (January-February 1994) Pages: 203- 210
Editor(s)
K Sampson
Date Published
1994
Length
8 pages
Annotation
In exploring issues in private judging, this panel considers the loss in quality of court personnel as more are drawn into private judging, the selection of a dispute- settlement mechanism, the time factor, informed consumers, disclosure, mediator selection, and confidentiality.
Abstract
For the purposes of this panel discussion, "private judging" refers to any private mechanism for resolving disputes, such as arbitration, mediation, court-annexed arbitration, as well as private judging. In discussing whether private dispute mechanisms will drain high-quality judges from the public bench, most panelists agree that it is not currently a problem, since most judges will remain on the bench until they can receive their maximum pension. In discussing the decision about whether to take a dispute to a court or private dispute settlement, the panelists note that many private dispute-settlement mechanisms do not allow for appeal nor enforcement of the decision. The courts offer not only the structure for appeal but also procedures that have evolved for the protection and benefit of both parties. Regarding processing time, the panelists agree that private judging is attractive because it generally provides a quicker settlement than the courts. Another issue considered is the contractual requirement of some companies that clients use the private dispute-settlement enterprise selected by the company in the event of a dispute. Consumers should be aware of such contractual requirements. Other issues considered are disclosure by the private judge of any past connections with the parties, big companies opting out of the court system for private dispute settlement, criteria for selecting a mediator, and confidentiality as a primary reason many parties prefer private dispute settlement.