Expert opinion is a form of alternative dispute resolution where the parties ask an independent expert to make a binding decision on a dispute. If the clause is properly developed and used in the right circumstances, the expert`s provision can provide an effective and inexpensive way to resolve a dispute. It is generally used for technical disputes or during an evaluation. Expert determination clauses operate entirely on a contractual basis. The parties may choose, without interference from the courts, which they intend to refer to the issue in question and the precise limits of its authority. There is no legislative support, as there is for arbitration (for example, the Arbitration Act 1996, which supports arbitration in England and Wales). As a result, the process is often much faster and much cheaper than litigation or arbitration proceedings. The downside is that there are very limited grounds for appealing an expert`s decision; If the expert is wrong, the parties stick to the decision. An expert decision is also not final, such as an arbitration award or a court decision. The execution must be carried out through a new infringement procedure.
These issues can be dealt with with care. Of all dispute resolution clauses, an expert determination clause requires the utmost care and adaptation to the circumstances. For more information, check out our Quickguide: Expert Determination. Traditionally, the most important choice for dispute resolution has been arbitration or litigation. However, in recent years, the contracting parties have become more creative in adapting these forums and have become totally discouraged in some areas. The parties are now opting for more cost-effective, efficient and personalized ways to deal with their disputes, and they are dealing with them in their contracts. As a result, dispute resolution clauses become longer and more complex. If formulated in a clear and thoughtful manner, they can ensure that disputes are resolved in a way that best supports the commercial interests of the parties. If this is not the case, the parties may find themselves in the forum they particularly wanted to avoid in the context of a delayed and lengthy procedure. The following is a brief overview of the main mechanisms used and the design of the needles.
In forms of binding dispute resolution, the parties submit their dispute to a third party arbitrator (for example. B a judge or arbitrator) to make a decision that binds them (subject to an agreed appeal procedure). The most common alternatives are: in the days (for example. B 20) days after the selection of the arbitrator or arbitrators, the applicant must submit a written motion to the arbitrator and the other party, including a statement of facts, issues of dispute and remedies sought. Use our conciliation form to establish an online arbitration agreement in just a few minutes. While there are some definitive benefits of using an arbitration agreement, there are also some drawbacks that you should note, too. Knowing both parties can help you make the best decision for your business. These are some of the main drawbacks: the Ericsson case and the other examples cited above underline the importance of clear wording in dispute resolution clauses. In this context, sufficient time should be given to negotiations to carefully consider the dispute settlement mechanism in the treaty. Where the purpose of the contract has significant economic value, an expert opinion should be sought to ensure that pathological defects are avoided and that the dispute resolution mechanism is effective in the manner considered by the parties. This should lead to a speedy and effective resolution of disputes and, where possible, to the maintenance of relations between the parties.