Negotiation Advantages

• More Flexible Than Civil Litigation

  There is because parties can agree the process whereas the strict Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) set out the process in litigation. This means the parties will usually be able to arrange the sessions for when is convenient for them so could schedule them for during their lunch break, in the evenings or of a weekend. This will prevent them having to take time off from work which is a luxury compared to civil litigation when the court timetable would dictate to them when and where the hearing will take place. The parties can continue trying to reach a resolution until it has been resolved but also have the freedom to stop at any time. Eg negotiation can be used from the beginning right up until the start of the court hearing. The lack of legal rules in negotiation also provides flexibility as remedies may be available that are not available in litigation, such as an apology.
• No Need To Be Adversarial

  This allows the parties to maintain a relationship after the negotiation has been completed. The aim of negotiation is to get both sides to compromise. It avoids the problem with the court in which each side wants the other to lose. This is especially important when the dispute is between close parties, such as neighbours or business associates, as they will hopefully be able to continue their relationship after the ADR process has ended, which they may not be able to do after litigation.
• Cost Effective

  Negotiation is free as the parties can negotiate themselves or appoint a friend to negotiate on their behalf. The actual negotiations can take place anywhere that suits the parties. This means it can take place over the phone, via e-mail or face to face all involving minimal to no costs particularly if solicitors are not involved. The use of legal representation can increase the cost although as there are no court fees this will work out cheaper than litigation. Negotiation encourages the parties to deal directly without lawyers whereas litigation encourages the parties to instruct lawyers. For example; a tenant who has a dispute with his landlord over the rent would usually try to negotiate a settlement but if the dispute went to court, the tenant would feel he had to instruct a lawyer. Ultimately, there is evidence showing negotiation is more cost-effective than court.
• Time

  Negotiation is a lot quicker than a court hearing as the parties are in control of the timetable. They can schedule for them to commence as soon as is convenient. Most negotiations are normally completed within a short space of time. This results in the dispute being resolved a lot quicker than civil litigation which can take many months for even the court hearing date. Generally, the quicker negotiations begin, the more chance there is of a settlement being reached.