This collection of essays is designed as an introduction to mediation and the use of mediation processes for anyone interested in the field of alternative dispute resolution. The task of the mediator in mediation is to facilitate an agreement between the disputing parties. These essays review the use and practice of mediation in relation to a wide range of fields, including family law, crime, compensation for personal injuries, business disputes, building and construction law, the environment and labour relations. Papers are alsoincluded which aim to orientate the reader to the principles of mediation and interest-based dispute resolution and the issues these raise for the future of conflict resolution services, including ethical issues in mediation, mediation training, and the present and future development of mediation services within organizations, communities and the court system.

Over the past thirty years, there has been a dramatic shift in the way the legal system approaches and resolves family disputes. Traditionally, family law dispute resolution was based on an “adversary” system: two parties and their advocates stood before a judge who determined which party was at fault in a divorce and who would be awarded the rights in a custody dispute. Now, many family courts are opting for a “problem-solving” model in which courts attempt to resolve both legal and non-legal issues. At the same time, American families have changed dramatically. Divorce rates have leveled off and begun to drop, while the number of children born and raised outside of marriage has increased sharply. Fathers are more likely to seek an active role in their children’s lives. While this enhanced paternal involvement benefits children, it also increases the likelihood of disputes between parents. As a result, the families who seek legal dispute resolution have become more diverse and their legal situations more complex. In Divorced from Reality, Jane C. Murphy and Jana B. Singer argue that the current "problem solving" model fails to address the realities of today's families. The authors suggest that while today’s dispute resolution regime may represent an improvement over its more adversary predecessor, it is built largely around the model of a divorcing nuclear family with lawyers representing all parties—a model that fits poorly with the realities of today's disputing families. To serve the families it is meant to help, the legal system must adapt and reshape itself.

"Over the past thirty years, there has been a dramatic shift in the way the legal system approaches family disputes. Traditionally, family disputes were resolved through an 'adversary' system: opposing parties appealed to a judge who determined which party was at fault and how the marital assets - including the children - should be divided. Now, many family courts are opting for a 'problem-solving' model in which courts attempt to restructure families by resolving both legal and nonlegal issues. At the same time, American families have changed dramatically. Divorce rates have slowed, while the number of children born and raised outside of marriage has increased sharply. Grandparents and same-sex partners care for children, and more fathers seek an active role in their children's lives. As a result, families in today's court system have become more diverse and their legal situations more complex. In Divorced from Reality, Jane C. Murphy and Jana B. Singer argue that the current 'problem-solving' model fails to address the realities of today's families. While today's dispute resolution regime may represent an improvement over its more adversary predecessor, it is built largely around the model of a divorcing nuclear family with lawyers representing all parties - a model that fits poorly with the realities of today's disputing families. And courts may no longer be the best place for families in conflict. To serve the families it is meant to help, the legal system must adapt and reshape itself"--Unedited summary from book jacket.

The proposed book draws on the on-going South China Sea dispute, and the multifaceted challenges wrought by the South China Sea issue that requires an inter-disciplinary perspective. It employs legal-analytical methods, to emphasize the nuances of the role and interpretation of international law and treaties by China in different periods, while taking into account policy and strategic concerns, which generally cast great sways in decision-making. The re-introduction of interdisciplinary concerns straddling law and history illustrates that the historical dimension, which has long been neglected, is an emerging concern that poses looming dangers that may unexpectedly radicalize the friction. Contributing to debunking the mystique wrought by confrontations between a historical and a law-dominated perspective, these perspectives are supported by a more nuanced analytical framework, featuring theoretical concerns with a tinge of practicality. The South China Sea Dispute aims to unveil a nuanced evolution of the issue with a confluence of inter-temporal law, policy and maritime practices in the South China Sea.

Over the past thirty years, there has been a dramatic shift in the way the legal system approaches and resolves family disputes. Traditionally, family law dispute resolution was based on an "adversary" system: two parties and their advocates stood before a judge who determined which party was at fault in a divorce and who would be awarded the rights in a custody dispute. Now, many family courts are opting for a "problem-solving" model in which courts attempt to resolve both legal and non-legal issues. At the same time, American families have changed dramatically. Divorce rates have leveled of ...

Arbitration is the normal and preferred mode for resolving international commercial disputes. It presents an essential advantage over national courts by offering neutrality of adjudication, but is currently only available where both parties have consented to it. This innovative book proposes a fundamental rethink of this assumption and argues that arbitration should become the default mode of resolution in international commercial disputes.

This wide-ranging study considers the primary forms of decision-making - negotiation, mediation, and umpiring - in the context of rapidly changing discourses and practices of civil justice across many jurisdictions. Much contemporary discussion in this field, and associated projects of institutional design, are taking place under the wide ranging but imprecise label of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). If a common linking theme is sought, the authors argue that this must lie in a general shift of priorities as between judgement and settlement in ideological terms. This new edition brings together and analyses a wide range of materials dealing with dispute processes and the current debates on civil justice. With the help of a selection of texts beyond those ordinarily found in the emerging alternative dispute resolution literature it provides a broad, comparative perspective on modes of handling civil disputes, with the principal focus on the central processes of negotiation and mediation.