Solvinga Breach of Contract
In the process of solving the breach of contracts between twoparties, the traditional litigation such as the court cases mighthave strengths and weaknesses too. One of the strengths is that thecases are based on the contract agreements and what the law states onthe same issue. Besides that, the court cases will also seek justiceand punish the one that had breached the contract and lastly evenaward the victim. On the other hand, the parties might face someconsequences by engaging in court cases to solve the issues theymight have. First, the court cases are known to damage relationships,and the parties are more likely to terminate the contracts they had(Lumineau & Malhotra, 2011). More often, the court cases alsoprovide the win-lose solutions that might make one of the partiesseem bad and even tarnish the reputation of the loser. The tarnishedreputation might even reduce the chances of the party engaging inother successful business agreements in the future (Lumineau &Malhotra, 2011). Apart from that, the court cases also need enormoussums of money that have to pay the court fees as well as the lawyers.They might even nurture some long-standing disputes that will reducethe likelihood of any future transactions between the two concernedparties.
One might even consider the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) thatwill look at the other ways other than the court cases. Arbitrationis one of the approaches, and it ensures that the two parties solvetheir issues in a polite manner without any animosity. Morespecifically, the two parties agree on a third party that will thenmake a binding decision (Ridley‐Duff& Bennett, 2011). At times, the two conflicting parties mighteven choose a single arbitrator or even a panel of arbitrators thatwill help them. The arbitrators will hear the evidence and thearguments that will be presented before the panel as they analyze thelegal rights of both parties. However, the presentation of argumentsand the evidence will exclude the rules of procedure that are commonin court cases (Ridley‐Duff& Bennett, 2011). Another form of ADR is mediation that also usesa third party to ensure that the affected parties find a solution. Inparticular, the third party is neutral and does not impose anysolution, but rather helps the parties resolve the conflict on theirown. An arbitrator is known to impose a solution that both partieswill comply with while a mediator simply helps the parties inunderstanding the appropriate steps that they should follow (Davis &Turku, 2011). In fact, a mediator also urges the participants toreveal some of the issues they have. The mediator will also clarifythe objectives of the entire process help them understand theagendas, the problems as well as the main source of conflict. In theprocess, the participants will then devise a number of realisticexpectations and suggest solutions that will help them.
In this case, ADR and especially mediation will be the appropriatelegal action to solve the conflict between my distributor and me.More specifically, litigation creates animosity and reduces thelikelihood of future business agreements. However, ADR will insist ongood communication and trust between the two parties, which will helpus in identifying our mistakes and planning the solutions that willreduce the conflict. The entire mediation process will help in makingour bond stronger and increase the likelihood of engaging in businessagreements in the future.
Davis, W., & Turku, H. (2011). Access to justice and alternativedispute resolution. J. Disp. Resol., 47.
Lumineau, F., & Malhotra, D. (2011). Shadow of the contract: Howcontract structure shapes interfirm dispute resolution. StrategicManagement Journal, 32(5), 532-555.
Ridley‐Duff, R., &Bennett, A. (2011). Towards mediation: developing a theoreticalframework to understand alternative dispute resolution. IndustrialRelations Journal, 42(2), 106-123.