MED-ARB

   In one form of Med-Arb, the parties agree in advance that (either in any disputes that may
   arise between them or in a particular dispute that has arisen) a neutral will act first as
   mediator and subsequently, if needed, as arbitrator. If agreement is reached in mediation, the
   parties sign a binding settlement agreement or the neutral may, by consent, convert their
   settlement into an arbitral award. If the mediation does not produce agreement on all issues,
   the mediator becomes arbitrator and hears and determines the unresolved issues. The award may
   be non-binding or binding depending upon the agreement entered into by the disputants.

   Another form involves different neutrals fulfilling the roles of mediator and arbitrator. The
   feature that has attracted the most criticism is having both roles played by the same person.

   

   There are several varieties of Med-Arb, such as Non-Binding Med-Arb (rarely used because there
   is no certainty of resolving the dispute); Med-Arb Show Cause, in which the award is merely
   tentative, and the parties are given an opportunity to show cause as to why the dispute should
   not be so resolved; and Medaloa (Mediation and Last-Offer Arbitration) in which the arbitrator
   does not reach an independent decision on the merits but instead must  choose between the
   parties’ final offers.

   

   Arb-Med

   This is the reverse of Med-Arb.  The arbitrator’s award is sealed and is not revealed while
   the arbitrator proceeds to conduct a mediation. If the mediation is successful, the settlement
   agreement between the parties governs the resolution of the dispute and the award is never
   unsealed. However, if mediation fails to settle all issues, the arbitrator-mediator will
   unseal the arbitral award and deliver it to the parties to resolve the dispute.

   Arb-Med has been used in South African union management relations in the auto and steel
   industries and in the United States in police and firefighter arbitrations.  Arb-Med has been
   proposed for use in the United States in the airline industry.

   Minitrial

   Minitrials involve a structured settlement process in which both parties present abbreviated
   summaries of their case before the other party and/or their representatives who have authority
   to settle the dispute. The summaries contain explicit data about the legal bases and the
   merits of the case. The process generally follows more relaxed rules for discovery and case
   presentation than might be found in a court, and the parties usually agree on specific limited
   periods of time for presentations and arguments.

   ADR: Mini-trial

   There are actually two types of mini-trial: the "Executive Mini-trial" and the "Judicial
   Mini-trial."

   Executive Mini-trial: An Executive mini-trial is actually not a trial. Instead, it involves a
   structured settlement process in which each side to a dispute presents abbreviated summaries
   of its cases to the major decision-makers for the parties who have authority to settle the
   dispute. The summaries contain explicit data about the legal basis and the merits of a case.

   How is it done? The process generally follows more relaxed rules of discovery and case
   presentation than might be found in a court or other formal proceeding and usually the parties
   agree on specific limited periods of time for presentations and arguments.

   A third party neutral may oversee a mini-trial. That individual is responsible for explaining
   and maintaining an orderly process of case presentations and may give an advisory opinion
   regarding a settlement range, if requested, rather than offer a specific solution for the
   parties to consider. The third party may also provide mediation services upon request.

   When is it used? The rationale behind an executive mini-trial is that if the decision-makers
   are fully informed as to the merits of their cases and that of the opposing parties, they will
   be better prepared to successfully engage in settlement discussions.

   Judicial Mini-trial: A Judicial mini-trial is an abbreviated hearing that involves attorneys
   for all of the parties to the litigation.

   How is it done? Attorneys put on their clients' experts for a quick decision on the
   preliminary issue, by a Judge picked for that particular purpose. At the conclusion of the
   mini-trial, the judge renders a non-binding opinion. If the parties are unable to conclude a
   settlement, the case will proceed to trial in the normal manner.

   When is it used? The Judicial mini-trial can be helpful when the parties are unwilling to
   negotiate on the full range of issues because they are "stuck" on a preliminary issue that
   both sides think they can win. The mini-trial on preliminary issues may be effective to break
   the logjam.

   

   CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD

   CRB is usually used in costly investment projects. Its purpose is to solve the disputes to
   avoid the work on the project being stopped.  The board watches the project, proposes
   solutions of disputes, which the parties are unable to solve themselves. The position of the
   CRB can be also used as evidence at court or arbitral proceedings.

   

   INDEPENDENT EXPERT

   The contract parties delegate on the expert the right to continuously solve disputes which
   might arise. The services of the expert are usually used to solve technical rather than legal
   problems. The expert’s report may later become the pivotal impulse for commencing legal
   action.