Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:22:33.056Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Alternative dispute resolution and access to justice in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2020

Mary Anne Noone  and
Lola Akin Ojelabi
Mary Anne Noone
Affiliation:
Professor, La Trobe Law School, La Trobe University, Australia
Lola Akin Ojelabi*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, La Trobe Law School, La Trobe University, Australia
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the last four decades, there has been a significant increase in the number and variety of appropriate dispute-resolution (ADR) institutions and processes in Australia as a critical aspect of improved access to justice. Although more people can get assistance to resolve their disputes, the issues of whether this access is shared equally within the community, how the disadvantaged fare in these processes and what type of justice is provided by the various ADR processes are explored. The relevance of legislative objectives of ADR fora and processes to justice outcomes is highlighted. It is argued that ADR processes need to be designed and implemented bearing in mind the type/nature of the dispute, parties involved and availability of resources, and to have an overarching objective of promoting access to justice for users. Additionally, improved access to justice requires ongoing and rigorous evaluation of ADR processes to ascertain whether justice objectives are being achieved.

Keywords

ADRaccess to justicejustice qualitylegislation-based ADRODRevaluation
Type
Article
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 16 , Special Issue 2: Jurisdictional Perspectives on Alternative Dispute Resolution and Access to Justice , June 2020 , pp. 108 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Access to Justice Advisory Committee (1994) Access to Justice: An Action Plan. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Access to Justice Taskforce (2009) A Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System. Canberra: Attorney-General's Department, Australian Government.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2011a) Community legal centres’ views on ADR as a means of improving access to justice – Part I. Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 22, 111–117.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2011b) Community legal centres’ views on ADR as a means of improving access to justice – Part II. Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 22, 173–179.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2015) Adopting culture-specific dispute resolution processes in Australia: which way forward for access to justice? Australian Journal of Family Law 29, 235–251.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2016) An access to justice approach to mediation and the construction of positive legal professional identity. International Journal of the Legal Profession 23, 321–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2019a) Ethical issues in court-connected mediation. Civil Justice Quarterly 38, 61–77.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L (2019b) Exploring voice as a justice factor in mediation. Civil Justice Quarterly 38, 459–476.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L and Noone, MA (2017) ADR processes: connections between purpose, values, ethics and justice. Law in Context 35, 5–23.Google Scholar
Akin Ojelabi, L et al. (2011) A cultural assessment of family dispute resolution: findings about access, retention and outcomes from the evaluation of a family relationship centre. Journal of Family Studies 17, 220–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, S (2015a) Recognition and relationality with families and children from minority and cultural faith backgrounds in Australian family dispute resolution. Australian Journal of Family Law 29, 203–234.Google Scholar
Armstrong, S (2015b) Religion, culture and dispute resolution. Australian Journal of Family Law 29, 167–171.Google Scholar
Astor, H and Chinkin, C (2002) Dispute Resolution in Australia, 2nd edn. Sydney: LexisNexis Butterworths.Google Scholar
Attorney-General's Department (2009) A Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System: Report by the Access to Justice Taskforce. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018) Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2016–17. Available at https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/8146.0 (accessed 28 January 2020).Google Scholar
Australian Council of Social Service and University of New South Wales (ACOSS) (2018) Poverty in Australia. Sydney: ACOSS.Google Scholar
Australian Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (ADRAC) (2016a) Access to Justice and ADR. Available at https://www.adrac.org.au/access-to-justice (accessed 28 January2020).Google Scholar
Australian Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (ADRAC) (2016b) Online Dispute Resolution and ADR. Available at https://www.adrac.org.au/online-dispute-resolution (ADRAC B) (accessed 28 January 2020).Google Scholar
Australian Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (ADRAC) (2019) Conciliation: A Discussion Paper. Available at https://www.adrac.org.au/publications (ADRAC C) (accessed 28 January2020).Google Scholar
Australian Industrial Relations Commission (2006) Historical Overview: The Australian Industrial Relations Commission. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Australian Law Reform Commission (2000) Managing Justice: Review of the Federal Civil Justice Program. Report No. 89. Canberra: Australian Law Reform Commission.Google Scholar
Bellucci, E and Zeleznikow, J (2006) Developing negotiation decision support systems that support mediators: a case study of the family winner system. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law 13, 233–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Better Place Australia (2018) Available at https://www.betterplaceaustralia.com.au/ (accessed 17 April 2020).Google Scholar
Brennan, C et al. (2017) Consumer vulnerability and complaint handling: challenges, opportunities and dispute system design. International Journal of Consumer Studies 41, 638–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulle, L and Field, R (2017) Australian Dispute Resolution: Law and Practice. Chatswood, NSW: LexisNexis Australia.Google Scholar
Cappelletti, M (1993) Alternative dispute resolution processes within the framework of the world-wide access-to-justice movement. The Modern Law Review 56, 282–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelletti, M and Garth, B (1978) Access to justice: the world-wide movement to make rights effective. In Cappelletti, M and Garth, B (eds), Access to Justice: A World Survey. Milan: Sitjhoff & Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Cashman, P and Ginnivan, E (2019) Digital justice: online resolution of minor civil disputes and the use of digital technology in the conduct of complex litigation and class actions. Macquarie Law Journal 19, 39–79.Google Scholar
Cheshire, L and Fitzgerald, R (2015) From private nuisance to criminal behaviour: neighbour problems and neighbourhood context in an Australian city. Housing Studies 30, 100–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condliffe, P (2012) ‘Conflict in the compact city: preferences and the search for justice’. Unpublished PhD thesis, Victoria University.Google Scholar
Condliffe, P and Zeleznikow, J (2014) What process do disputants want? An experiment in disputant preferences. Monash University Law Review 40, 305–339.Google Scholar
Consumer Action Law Centre (2014) Submission 49, in Productivity Commission 2014, Access to Justice Arrangements: Inquiry Report. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Coumarelos, C et al. (2012) Access to Justice and Legal Needs. Vol. 8: Legal Australia-Wide Survey: Legal Need in New South Wales. Sydney: Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales.Google Scholar
Danzig, R and Lowy, MJ (1975) Everyday disputes and mediation in the United States: a reply to Professor Felstiner. Law and Society Review 9, 675–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dispute Settlement Centre of Victoria (2018) Available at https://www.disputes.vic.gov.au/ (accessed 7 April2020).Google Scholar
Douglas, K and Batagol, B (2014) The role of lawyers in mediation: insights from mediators at Victoria's Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Monash University Law Review 40, 758–792.Google Scholar
Ebner, N and Zeleznikow, J (2016) No sheriff in town: governance for online dispute resolution. Negotiation Journal 32, 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erez-Navot, D (2015) The repeat player effect in child protection mediation: dangers of and protections against second-class justice for marginalized parties. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 16, 831–856.Google Scholar
Field, R and Crowe, J (2017) Playing the language game of family mediation: implications for mediator ethics. Law in Context 35, 84–100.Google Scholar
Galanter, M (1974) Why the haves come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change volume. Law and Society Review 9, 165–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, M (1981) Justice in many rooms. In Cappelletti, M (ed.), Access to Justice and the Welfare State. Milan: Sijthoff & Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Genn, H (2012) What is civil justice for? Reform, ADR and access to justice. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 24, 397–417.Google Scholar
King, M et al. (2009) Non-Adversarial Justice. Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Press.Google Scholar
King, M et al. (2014) Non-Adversarial Justice, 2nd edn.Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Press.Google Scholar
Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales (2012) Access to Justice and Legal Needs. Vol. 7: Legal Australia-Wide Survey: Legal Need in Australia. Sydney: Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales.Google Scholar
Law Council of Australia (2018) Justice Project Final Report. Available at https://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/justice-project/final-report (accessed 28 January2020).Google Scholar
Law Reform Committee (2009) Inquiry into Alternative Dispute Resolution and Restorative Justice. Melbourne: Parliament of Victoria.Google Scholar
Lodder, AR and Zeleznikow, J (2005) Developing an online dispute resolution environment: dialogue tools and negotiation support systems in a three-step model. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 10, 287–337.Google Scholar
Mackay, RE and Moody, SR (1996) Diversion of neighbourhood disputes to community mediation. The Howard Journal 35, 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macquarie Concise Dictionary (2013) 3rd edn. Sydney: Macquarie Dictionary Publishers.Google Scholar
McFarlane Legal (2018) Available at https://www.mcfarlanelegal.com.au/ (accessed 9 April2020).Google Scholar
Mohr, LB (1982) Explaining Organizational Behaviour: The Limits and Possibilities of Theory and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Moorhead, R and Pleasence, P (2003) Access to justice after universalism: introduction. In Moorhead, R and Pleasence, P (eds), After Universalism: Re-Engineering Access to Justice. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (NADRAC) (2001) A Framework for ADR Standards: A Report to the Attorney-General. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (NADRAC) (2003) Dispute Resolution Terms: The Use of Terms in (Alternative) Dispute Resolution. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (NADRAC) (2006) Legislating for Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Guide for Government Policy-makers and Legal Drafters. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (NADRAC) (2009) The Resolve to Resolve – Embracing ADR to Improve Access to Justice in the Federal Jurisdiction: A Report to the Attorney-General. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
National Legal Aid (2017) Log-On Instead of Lawyering Up: Commonwealth Funds New Project to Deal with Divorce Disputes Digitally. Media Statement.Google Scholar
Noone, MA (2011) ADR, public interest law and access to justice: the need for vigilance. Monash University Law Review 37, 57–80.Google Scholar
Noone, MA and Akin, Ojelabi L (2014) Ensuring access to justice in mediation within the civil justice system. Monash University Law Review 40, 528–563.Google Scholar
NSW Government (2018) Community Justice Centres. Available at http://www.cjc.justice.nsw.gov.au/ (accessed 9 April 2020).Google Scholar
Parker, C (2000) Just Lawyers: Regulation and Access to Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (2014) Access to Justice Arrangements: Inquiry Report. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Relationships Australia (2017) Available at https://www.relationships.org.au/ (accessed 9 April 2020).Google Scholar
Riskin, LL and Welsh, NA (2008) Is that all there is? ‘The problem’ in court-oriented mediation. George Mason Law Review 15, 863–932.Google Scholar
Rundle, O (2015) Lawyers’ participation in mediation and professional ethical disposition. Legal Ethics 18, 46–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackville, R (1975) Law and Poverty in Australia: Second Main Report. Commission of Inquiry into Poverty, Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Sander, FEA (1976) Varieties of dispute processing. Federal Rules Decisions 77, 111–123.Google Scholar
Sourdin, T (2010) Mediation in the Supreme and County Courts of Victoria: A Research Report. Victoria: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Sourdin, T (2016) Alternative Dispute Resolution, 5th edn.Pyrmont, NSW: Thompson Reuters Legal.Google Scholar
Sourdin, T and Shanks, A (2015) Evaluating Alternative Dispute Resolution in Taxation Disputes – Exploring Selected ADR Processes that Took Place from 1 July 2013–30 June 2014: Final Report.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sourdin, et al. (2019) Just quick and cheap? Civil dispute resolution and technology. Macquarie Law Journal 19, 17–38.Google Scholar
Spencer, D et al. (2019) Dispute Resolution in Australia: Cases, Commentary and Materials, 4th edn. Pyrmont, NSW: Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Ltd.Google Scholar
Stranieri, A et al. (1999) A hybrid rule–neutral approach for the automation of legal reasoning in the discretionary domain of family law in Australia. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 153–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supreme Court of Victoria (2016/17) Annual Report. Melbourne: Supreme Court of Victoria.Google Scholar
Susskind, R (2013) Tomorrow's Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tan, V (2019) Online dispute resolution for small civil claims in Victoria: a new paradigm in civil justice. Deakin Law Review 24, 101–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, TR (1989) The quality of dispute resolution processes and outcomes: measurement problems and possibilities. Denver University Law Review 66, 419–436.Google Scholar
Victoria Government (2016) Access to Justice Review: Summary Report. Melbourne: Victorian Government Printer.Google Scholar
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) (2019) Annual Report 2018–2019. Melbourne: Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.Google Scholar
Victorian, Ombudsman (2019) WorkSafe 2: Follow-up Investigation into the Management of Complex Workers Compensation Claims. Melbourne: Victorian Government Printer.Google Scholar
Waldman, E (2011) Mediation Ethics: Cases and Commentaries. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
Waye, V (2016) Mandatory mediation in Australia's civil justice system. Common Law World Review 45, 214–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J (2005) Cradle of mediation: Community Justice Centres chalk up a quarter century. Law Society Journal 43, 74–76.Google Scholar
Woolf, H Sir (1996) Access to Justice: Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the Civil Justice System in England and Wales. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Zeleznikow, J (2011) Methods for incorporating fairness into the development of an online family dispute resolution environment. Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 22, 16–21.Google Scholar