Thank You to everyone
who gave feedback on the Core Questions.
The Core Questions are currently being finalised and can no longer be modified. These questions have been developed via a lengthy consultation process involving 6 prior drafts, a global survey (click here to view the anonymous results), and a public consultation period.
Given their importance to the GPC Series and the desire to ensure that the voices of all stakeholders will have been heard during the drafting process, we thank everyone for their contribution to the formulation of the Core Questions.
To join the discussion on the Core Questions, please join the LinkedIn Group
The Core Questions
Each event will use a technology platform to enable all participates to vote on a set of standardised core questions. These questions will enable all stakeholders to share their views on the future of dispute resolution, what tools are required, and how to modernise the dispute resolution landscape. The questions are intended to explore the needs and wishes of users and what access to justice means to them, and all other stakeholders.
The core questions will be voted upon and discussed in four sessions, to provide time for reflection and discussion. View a sample from the Draft Core Quesitons: Session 1: ACCESS TO JUSTICE & DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMS: WHAT DO USERS NEED & EXPECT? During this Session, participants will discuss what commercial and civil disputants really want and expect when initiating dispute resolution processes. Key questions to be covered will include:
- Are users sufficiently informed about their choices and possible consequences?
- What influences users most when selecting dispute resolution processes?
- Are the needs the same for domestic and cross-border cases?
- The primary goal is to understand the choices available and how appropriate they are, given disputants’ limited resources in time and money, as well as their needs in terms of outcomes or preserving relationships. The Core Questions will generate discussion and data about the “demand side” for dispute resolution processes and access to justice.
Session 2: HOW IS THE MARKET CURRENTLY ADDRESSING USERS’ NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS? During this Session, participants will reflect on how well current dispute resolution services are serving the needs of disputants, as expressed during Session 1. Key questions to be covered will include:
- Do providers and advisors know or properly advise on what types of processes to offer and when?
- What is the impact of choice of process on outcomes?
- Should providers treat the process itself as part of the problem when offering dispute resolution services?
- Are they sufficiently clear when explaining the benefits of consensual v. adjudicative processes, and are they alternatives or can they be combined?
The Core Questions will generate debate on whether new services and innovation are needed, both in the private sector and in the public sector of the “supply side” of the dispute resolution market and access to justice. Session 3: HOW CAN DISPUTE RESOLUTION BE IMPROVED, AND OBSTACLES AND CHALLENGES OVERCOME? During this Session, participants will be able to focus on some of the primary obstacle and challenges identified during Sessions 1 and 2. Key questions to be covered will include:
- What are the main obstacles or challenges that users, providers and advisors need to overcome?
- Are attorneys and their clients sufficiently educated and informed regarding ADR options for their case?
- Are ADR centers or providers readily available everywhere they are needed?
- Are new hybrid solutions combining both mediation and arbitration to settle a case being developed and are they making a difference?
- Should “fixed price” and “fixed deadline” processes be offered?
- How can technology be used better to reduce costs and timelines?
- Should providers and advisors be expected to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and experience with different dispute resolution systems (e.g., through accreditation processes?)
- Should users be more actively involved in shaping dispute resolution processes and customizing them to their own needs?
- How can social relationships, emotional and inter-cultural issues be better taken into account?
- Do we have adequate diagnostic systems for designing processes? Who should make these decisions?
- Are all stakeholders sufficiently involved in designing dispute resolution processes?
The Core Questions in this Session will provoke a dialogue about new services or ways of offering choices to disputants aiming to improve dispute resolution systems and access to justice. Session 4: PROMOTING BETTER ACCESS TO JUSTICE: WHAT ACTION ITEMS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AND BY WHOM? This Session will discuss what each stakeholder group can do to improve access to adjudicative and consensual processes in the future, building on discussions during the first three sessions. Key questions to be covered will include:
- Should providers automatically offer consensual processes during adjudicative processes?
- Should providers be more assertive in reducing the time and costs of outcomes (e.g., through cost savings or sanctions)?
- Is harmonization of international conventions for the recognition and enforcement of different dispute resolution processes and their outcomes needed?
- How can all stakeholders better utilize new technologies and scientific findings to enhance dispute resolution processes and improve access to justice?
The Core Questions in this session will generate conversations on the responsibilities of each stakeholder group in shaping the future of dispute resolution, and on empowering to improve access to justice now and in the future.
THE RESULTSThe data collected in response to the core questions will be available online as each event occurs. It will be compiled into a final report at the end of 2017, to help shape how dispute resolution may be conducted for years to come. The data and report will be publicly available via this website to anyone wishing to read them. It is hoped they will support new research in the field and help consolidate stakeholder views on dispute resolution, providing optimal access to justice for all disputants.