Custom Commercial and Investment Dispute essay paper sample
Buy custom Commercial and Investment Dispute essay paper cheap
Since facilitation give room for the parties involved to determine the facilitator to facilitate the process of resolution is very advantageous in resolving cases involving commercial and investment disputes. The three core values that that guides the facilitation practice are; free the choice that is informed, the commitment to made choices and the information that is valid, mean that every institution that is involved shares all kinds of information considered vital to the matter at hand. It also means that the parties do understand the information and its consequences, (Brad, S. 2003).
The advantage of free and informed choice is that the parties have the capability of defining their own objectives and the ways that these objectives can be attained. With the availability of facilitators help the parties in determining or altering their objective if possible, and make an assessment as to whether earlier option meets the set goals. This is very important because most of the companies that are involved in such cases of commercial and investment disputes are founded in and governed by legal systems that are different hence need a facilitator to make both sides understand legal systems of each other. However the ultimate decisions are left to the parties themselves. This form of commitment arise as individuals are happy with the decisions and their involvement hence fill satisfied and motivated, not due to the possibility of the rewards or punishment for supporting it other than the inborn in the agreement itself, (Ury, 2000).
|Get a Price Quote:|
* Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system.
Schwartz (1994) states that as compared to arbitration, which though flexible but the formalized process before the arbitration panel is time consuming and costly hence undermining the utility of the mechanism. The process is adverse which in many circumstances ends with win-lose condition. The outcome might re-escalate if the enforcement mechanism is less sustainable so arbitration should only be reached upon other methods like facilitation has failed, (Leb, 2003).
In conclusion, the two approaches, both deals with third parties but the role of the third party is the one that differentiate them. So each of them has a specific condition that it works best, so institutions should choose the one that best suits them.