One of the first and most remarkable ADR initiatives in Canada began on January 4, 1999 with the creation of the Ontario Mandatory Mediation Program.  This program included the implementation of Rule 24.1, which introduced mandatory mediation for non-family civil matters.  Beginning with a selection of courts in Ontario and Ottawa in 1999, the program expanded in 2002 to Windsor, the third largest area of law in Ontario.  Until now, opposition to mandatory mediation instead of traditional litigation has been based on the idea that mediation practices are effective when the parties to the dispute voluntarily agree to the procedure.  However, reports analyzing the effectiveness of Ontario`s experience concluded that mandatory mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution versus a comparison group could reduce both the cost and time it takes to seek dispute resolution. In addition, 2/3 of the parties interviewed for this study highlighted the benefits of mandatory mediation, including: Before the introduction of modern constitutional law under colonialism, African customary law systems relied primarily on mediation and arbitration. In many countries, these traditional mechanisms have been integrated into the formal legal system. In Benin, specialized conciliation courts deal with a wide range of civil law issues. The results are then transmitted to the court of first instance, where either a successful conciliation is confirmed or the higher court assumes jurisdiction. Similar dishes also work in different modes in other French-speaking African countries.  Alternative dispute resolution in India is not new and existed even under the previous Arbitration Act of 1940. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 was enacted to reflect the harmonization mandates of the UNCITRAL model.
To streamline the Indian legal system, traditional civil law, known as the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), was also amended in 1908 and Article 89 was introduced. § 89 (1) CPC offers an opportunity for alternative dispute resolution. It provides that if the court considers that there are elements that may be acceptable to the parties, it may formulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer them to conciliation, conciliation, mediation or judicial settlement. The time limit for bringing an appeal against the setting aside of an arbitral award has expired or, if such an appeal is dismissed, the award shall be binding on the parties and shall be considered a judgment of the tribunal. That is, some cases and complaints should indeed be made on a formal complaint, in court, with the police, a compliance officer or a government IG. Other disputes could be resolved by the parties if they had sufficient support and guidance, and still other cases require mediation or arbitration. Thus, “alternative” dispute resolution generally refers to a method that is not that of the courts. “Appropriate” dispute resolution takes into account all possible options for responsible dispute resolution that are relevant to a particular issue.  Neutral assessment: A neutral person with expertise hears abbreviated arguments, examines the strengths and weaknesses of each party`s case, and offers an assessment of the likely outcomes of the courts in promoting an agreement. The neutral assessor may also provide assistance in planning and resolving cases with the consent of the parties. ADR includes informal courts, informal mediation procedures, formal courts and formal mediation procedures.
The classic formal forms of justice in ADR are arbitration (both binding and consultative or non-binding) and private judges (either alone, in panels or in summary trials with jury). The classic formal mediation procedure is the referral of the mediation to a court-appointed mediator or mediation body. Structured transformative mediation, as used by the U.S. Postal Service, is a formal process. Traditional informal methods include social processes, referrals to non-formal authorities (e.g., a respected member of a business or social group), and intercession. The main differences between formal and informal proceedings are (a) the pending nature of a court case and (b) the possession or absence of a formal structure for the application of the proceedings. Conceptualizing ADR in this way makes it easy to avoid confusing tools and methods (does negotiation cease to be ADR once a lawsuit has been filed? If it is a tool, then the question is the wrong question) (is mediation ADR, unless ordered by a court? If you consider court orders and similar things to be formalism, then the answer is clear: court-sanctioned mediation is just a formal ADR process). With the exception of a few interim measures, there are very few possibilities for judicial intervention in arbitration.
The arbitral tribunal shall have jurisdiction over its own jurisdiction. Thus, if a party wishes to challenge the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, it may do so only before the tribunal itself. If the court rejects the claim, there is little the party can do except to go to a court after the court has made an arbitral award. Article 34 contains certain grounds on which a party may appeal to the main civil court of the court of origin to set aside the award. New York State`s Unified Court System provides parties with access to free or discounted mediation and other ADR services in family law, general civil and commercial litigation. These services are available in many courthouses and community dispute resolution centers in nearly every 62 boroughs of New York State. In the 1980s and 1990s, Canada witnessed the beginning of a “cultural shift” in its experiences with ADR practices.  During this period, the need for an alternative to the more adversarial approach to dispute resolution typical of traditional court proceedings was recognized.
This growth has continued over the coming decades, with ADR now widely recognized as a legitimate and effective approach to dispute resolution. In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada in Hryniak v. Mauldin stated that “meaningful access to justice today is the greatest challenge to the rule of law in Canada. [That] The balance between trial and access found by our justice system must reflect modern reality and recognize that new models of justice can be fair and equitable.  However, in the decades leading up to this statement, there had already been a number of experiences with SA practices in the provinces. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is generally divided into at least four types: negotiation, mediation, collaborative law and arbitration. Sometimes conciliation is included in the fifth category, but for the sake of simplicity, it can be considered a form of mediation. ADR can be used alongside existing legal systems such as Sharia courts in common law jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom.
Special Master: a neutral appointed by a court to perform some kind of action on his behalf. This may include monitoring detection issues, conference cases, or monitoring post-judgment activity. Despite the historical opposition of many popular parties and their supporters to ADR, ADR has gained wide acceptance in recent years, both among the public and the legal profession.