Also sometimes called non-binding arbitration.
It's a process where an expert -- either legal or based on the subject matter -- listens to the evidence and renders a professional opinion on the likely outcome. The neutral then often gives a recommendation on a settlement.
The parties can then follow that recommendation, or not. But it has no binding effect as a matter of law. Unlike binding arbitration, which is similar in process, different in outcome.
2007-03-22 13:02:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Having a "neutral" - some outside professional, typically a mediator, assess the facts of the dispute and the law that would be applied to those facts, in order to give the parties a non-biased analysis. Once the parties have this, the theory goes, they will have a view of how a court might see their case, and reach a quick settlement.
Sometimes it works.
2007-03-22 20:08:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Outside party comes in and hears both sides to help make resolution
2007-03-22 19:59:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by ducheeny35 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's what courts are based on: getting an impartial observer to look at the dispute.
2007-03-22 19:59:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by llordlloyd 6
·
0⤊
0⤋