Alternative and atypical dispute settlement resolution methods
Eran Sthoeger and
Filippo Fontanelli
Chapter 28 in Research Handbook on International Procedural Law, 2024, pp 578-597 from Edward Elgar Publishing
Abstract:
In international litigation the principle of consent makes all methods of resolution effectively ‘alternative’ to each other. However, several typified or atypical processes fall between adjudication/arbitration and pure diplomatic negotiations, on a continuum of increasing flexibility as regards both process and substance. This chapter analyses these typified or atypical processes. It first briefly surveys the classical methods of enquiry, good offices, mediation and conciliation; then it provides an insight into two recent scenarios, in which an atypical process was established to resolve an ongoing international conflict. We advance an argument on the capacity of alternative and atypical methods to achieve genuine resolution. While their inherent trait is flexibility (which can spare dispute resolution attempts from strict observance of laws and procedures), the chances of producing an outcome that elicits respect are a function of each method’s compliance with basic considerations of procedural fairness.
Keywords: Law - Academic (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.elgaronline.com/doi/10.4337/9781788970792.00041 (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:elg:eechap:18416_28
Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.e-elgar.com
Access Statistics for this chapter
More chapters in Chapters from Edward Elgar Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Darrel McCalla ().