Dear Computers break, I hope this email finds you well. I would bepleased to offer you legal advice on the legal issue in relation to thedisputing party, have you tried restarting it (HYTRI) givena settlement has not been reached. In respect to the situation, the main element of thisdispute is whether you wrongly terminated the employment contract between youand the opposing counsel under which you arranged to advertise your repairservice throughout Leicestershire.
To resolve the conflict, I recommend alternative disputeresolution (ADR) which includes arbitration and mediation. Alternatively,litigation is a process of taking the conflict to court. Firstly, arbitration is a procedure which comprises a3rd party known as the arbitrator. Typically speaking, it willbe a lawyer/expert in the field of contracts. The legally binding decisionreached is known as award which can be imposed on you and HYTRI bythe courts.1 Following this, because the process is privatelyconducted, there’s no danger of outsiders getting access to sensitiveinformation such as the claim of HYTRI’s poor quality of work. Consequently, there’sno risk of publicity damage to your computer repair store company and serviceas a result due of report proceedings.
2 Under the arbitration act 1996, the courts only have aresidual level of intervention unlike litigation. This means courts can onlyintervene in this situation If there’s a failure in providing a justsettlement. 3 Regarding cost, arbitration is a cheaper procedurethan taking a case to court. Combined with using a specialist arbitrator means he/shehas expert knowledge of the area under consideration which is terminating acontract “for cause” but failing to identify it. Thus, they can come toconclusions within accepted practice. However, you should be aware of the fact utilizingspecialist arbitrators can be expensive nevertheless. The lack of a contract clause means arbitration isonly available only by the agreement of both you and HYTRI. Moreover, its muchquicker than taking the case through the courts but HYTRI and you may be able tomake use of the options to challenge the award the arbitrator has issued.
Consequently,this would mean the previous costs of arbitration would be wasted thus makingit expensive. The second type of mechanism you may consider ismediation which has been growing in popularity. It consists of a mediator whois a third party with the purpose of aiding you and HYTRI in comingto an agreement you both consider as satisfactory. This demonstrates astrength that both you and HYTRI have the final say in arriving at a decisionand will actively participate towards a common resolution when it comes topayment regarding the damages HYTRI are seeking for example.
However, havingsaid this, there’s often an assumption when it comes to mediation. This is theparties negotiate terms of their final agreement in an unhostile way and bychoice. Put simply this isn’t always the case. Often an inequality ofbargaining power and knowledge may exist. There are several different styles which you mayundergo with the first being facilitative mediation.
This is Fromthis we can deduce themediator will focus on aiding you and HYTRI to define issues such as the issuesregarding HYTRI losing a stream of business. This can be distinguished from anevaluative type because the mediator’s opinions will be neutral whenconsidering damages being sought by HYTRI for example. This shows you will be giventhe opportunity to describe the contract dispute from your perspective in theabsence of the restrictions imposed by civil rules.4 In contrast, in an evaluative type, the mediatorapplies his/her knowledge to give an opinion. This evaluation will also pointout strength and weaknesses of what you and HYTRI have proposed such as theclothing not being regulated under the contract. This illustrates an important advantageof mediation. This is because it gives a chance to test theories of your case.
Inthe absence of the process being monitored, it may lead to the powerfulparticipant to dominate the vulnerable party. This may lead to a forcedagreement between you and HYTRI. Alternatively, litigationis available which consists of taking the case through a court process and thejudge will resolve the case by considering the relevant evidence and testimony.It can take months to reach a decision thus is heavily time consuming becausethere are various steps before the trial begins.
One example would be preparingwitness statements of people who received poor quality of work. Not only arethe pre-trial steps but the court proceedings can be exceedingly complex. This meansmajority of your litigation expense would be incurred prior to trial and so it’sonly advantageous to the wealthier party who can hire an experienced employmentcontract lawyer to participate.Besides that,it could be argued litigation is unsuitable for this type of dispute because itis technical. There’s a good chance neither judge or jury will have the appropriateknowledge and experience to deal with the contract dispute which may result in inappropriatedecisions. However, it’s important to note the judge’s decision can beoverturned and can be appealed to a higher court. This diminutive appealprocess is not available in mediation.Arguably, by takingthe court route the commercial relationship between you and HYTRI will deteriorateand breakdown for obvious reasons such as the likelihood of a mutually unacceptabledecision.
Nevertheless, one element imperative to the resolution of the disputeis the courts have the power to oblige witnesses to attend. The right to a juryis also equally valuable.In summary, afterweighing and analysing the pros and cons of each method, mediation is the bestoption to undergo.
This is because it has a higher chance of preserving therelationship between you and HYTRI without putting your dispute in the publicdomain like civil litigation. Ultimately this is a faster process offeringsolutions further than a court could impose. Likewise, arbitration is deemed asan adversarial process because of the binding third party’s decision.
however,the element of control means you and HYTRI must agree to the settlement whichis difficult to achieve and could further result in a small claims hearing.If you have anyfurther enquiries, or wish to discuss the subject matter further, please do nothesitate to contact me. Yourssincerely, Katy BuckinghamMiss Katy Buckingham,For and on behalf of blacksmith, Storey and Catenari LLP