Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is now the centerpiece of Victorian and national civil justice policy. Advocates of ADR argue that it promotes access to justice. Skeptics assert that its primary aim is to cut costs, and that it compromises fundamental principles of fairness and transparency. In recent years, there has been an outpouring of state...

In the years since NADRAC was established, ADR has expanded into a large, highly diverse and innovative field. Consumers, lawyers and other stakeholders have a greatly improved, though still imperfect, appreciation of the benefits of ADR. Many stakeholders expressed a welcome understanding of the value of ADR. However, it was also evident that while there...

The National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (NADRAC) was established in 1995 as an independent body to provide the Attorney-General with policy advice on the development of ways of resolving or managing disputes without a judicial decision. On 13 June 2008 the Attorney-General wrote to NADRAC requesting that it enquire into and identify strategies to...

This report is the final product of the first stage of the commission’s civil justice inquiry. The terms of reference required the commission to undertake a number of tasks including identification of the goals of the civil justice system and the principles that should guide the rules of civil procedure. The commission was also asked...

Alternative dispute resolution processes are promoted as a means of increasing access to justice by disadvantaged groups and as an inexpensive way of solving legal or quasi-legal disputes. J. Joy Cumming and Janice M. Wilson investigate the difficulties experienced by users of alternative dispute resolution in Australia, as a result of their levels of literacy...