Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Jurisdictional perspectives on alternative dispute resolution and access to justice: introduction

  • Lola Akin Ojelabi (a1) and Mary Anne Noone (a2)

Extract

In many parts of the world, the adoption of alternative dispute-resolution (ADR) processes was premised on creating better access to justice for citizens, particularly those with lesser means (Woolf, 1996; Access to Justice Advisory Committee, 1994). ADR's foundational link with access to justice is in relation to not only justice as a process for the resolution of disputes, but also justice in relation to equality of access and equitable outcomes. This Special Issue focuses on the relationship between ADR and access to justice in various contexts and jurisdictions, including Australia, China, England and Wales, Scotland and Singapore, and within the family-law system in Australia. The papers engage in a critical discussion of ADR's contribution to access to justice in the resolution of disputes and, in particular, the extent to which ADR has contributed to improved access to justice. In doing this, the papers highlight the role of access-to-justice discourse in the development and growth of ADR; where available, review evaluations of access to justice in relation to ADR initiatives; and, finally, reflect on the future of ADR and access to justice.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Jurisdictional perspectives on alternative dispute resolution and access to justice: introduction
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Jurisdictional perspectives on alternative dispute resolution and access to justice: introduction
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Jurisdictional perspectives on alternative dispute resolution and access to justice: introduction
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. E-mail: o.akinojelabi@latrobe.edu.au

References

Hide All
Access to Justice Advisory Committee (1994) Access to Justice – an Action Plan. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 1994.
Akin Ojelabi, L and Noone, MA (2017) ADR processes: connections between purpose, values, ethics and justice. Law in Context 35, 523.
Cappelletti, M and Garth, B (1978) Access to justice: the worldwide movement to make rights effective: a general report. In Cappelletti, M and Garth, BG (eds), Access to Justice: A World Survey, Vol. 1. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff and Hoordhoff.
Delgado, R, Dunn, C, Brown, P, Lee, H and Hubert, D (1985) Fairness and family: minimizing the risk of prejudice in ADR. Wisconsin Law Review 85, 1359.
Field, R (2004) A feminist model of mediation that centralises the role of lawyers as advocates for participants who are victims of domestic violence. Australian Feminist Law Journal 20, 65.
Field, R and Crowe, J (2017) Playing the language game of family mediation: implications for mediator ethics. Law in Context 35, 84100.
Fiss, O (1984) Against settlement, The Yale Law Journal 93, 1073.
Genn, H (2012) What is civil justice for? Reform, ADR and access to justice. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 24, 397.
Grillo, T (1991) The mediation alternative: process dangers for women. The Yale Law Journal 100, 15451610.10.2307/796781
King, M, Freiberg, A, Batagol, B and Hyams, R (2014) Non-adversarial Justice. Annandale, NSW: Federation Press.
Mack, K (1995) Alternative dispute resolution and access to justice for women. Adelaide Law Review 17, 123.
Noone, MA and Akin, Ojelabi L (2014) Ensuring access to justice in mediation within the civil justice system. Monash University Law Review 40, 528.
Noone, MA, Akin Ojelabi, L and Buchanan, L (2018) Mediation Ethics and Justice. Pyrmont, NSW: Thomson Reuters.
Productivity Commission (2014) Access to Justice Arrangements, Vol. 1, Inquiry Report.
Sackville, R (2018) Law and poverty: a paradox. UNSW Law Journal 41, 8099.
Steffek, F and Unberath, H (2013) Regulating Dispute Resolution: ADR and Access to Justice at the Crossroads. Oxford: Hart Publishing Ltd.
Waldman, E (ed.) (2011) Mediation Ethics: Cases and Commentaries. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint.
Waldman, E and Akin, Ojelabi L (2016) Mediators and substantive justice: a view from Rawls’ original position. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 30, 391430.
Woolf, Lord (1996) Access to Justice: The Final Report. London: Lord Chancellor's Department.

Jurisdictional perspectives on alternative dispute resolution and access to justice: introduction

  • Lola Akin Ojelabi (a1) and Mary Anne Noone (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.