|← Public International Law||Police Use of Deadly Force →|
Tribunals came into existence in the English law system because of some reasons. Tribunals act as small courts that specialize in particular areas of law. The main reason why tribunals came in to existence in the English law system involves unclogging the congestion of cases in the civil courts. They do this by bringing in a fast and reliable track system. They encourage specialization among judges. Through specialization, judges sit in different tribunal courts to handle cases of different types (Slapper & Kelly, 2009, p 3)
Another reason why tribunals came into existence involves the need for specialization cases. Handling certain cases required more than the general knowledge that judges had in law. Tribunals offered the best way, to deal with such cases. By establishing them, judges began specializing in areas of interest, to ease handling of cases that required specialization. Other disputes that did not require the attention of ordinary courts, for instance solving rent disputes called for the introduction of tribunal.
The first advantage that tribunals offered to the English law system involves enabling a quick turn over of cases. Many people solved their disputes out of courts. Through specialization, many cases that required expertise became easy, to solve. Issues that deal with the government and private citizens, such as social security reasons got the right place, to solve them. The other advantages involve informal settings. They operate in informal settings as compared to other court systems. This makes employment tribunals cheap as compared to the others. They have the ability to follow their own precedents. This makes them autonomous (Cottret, Hearn & Mioche, 2004, p 71).
Tribunals have some disadvantages. Some of the tribunals have become formal. The formality of these tribunals has interfered with their performance. The tribunals should operate independently without following strict guidelines. Therefore, formality interferes with their normal functioning. They do not operate independently of the government. Sometimes, the government interferes with the functional system of the tribunal courts. Legal help cannot be availed except for land tribunals, the employment tribunals. His makes it difficult, to solve certain disputes that may require legal help on how to deal with them. Lastly, they do not have a general right of appeal to the formal courts (Cownie, Bradney & Burton, 2007, p 74).
Funding a case at the employment tribunal has problems because it involves high costs. The employment tribunals require hat an individual pays for his or her own case. This happens irrespective of whether one wins or loses. Besides his, one could pay the costs of his or her opponents under certain circumstances. The employment tribunal has power, to order that one pay the legal cost of the opponent. This makes funding at the employment tribunal a significant problem. People of all occupations seek the help of employment tribunal, to help solve their disputes. This becomes a problem because not all people can afford to pay for their disputes.
The employment tribunal composes of a tribunal judge and two non-legal representatives. The tribunal judge has the responsibility of everything that goes on in the employment tribunal. He does so because he acts as the legal advisor in matters that happen in the employment tribunal. The tribunal judge must be aware of all legal issues that entangle the employment tribunal. The judge must know how to assess issues that deal with employment. He or she acts as the director in the employment tribunal. The tribunal judge ensures that the case follows law proceeds. The other two representatives must have wisdom concerning hearing employment, law cases. They do not work for the government and may not hear the case to the end (Slapper, G & Kelly, G. 2001, p 293).
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) refers to collection of processes used for resolving disputes confidentially or informally. It provides unconventional ways, to traditional ways of solving disputes. However, it does not displace the traditional ways of dealing with disputes and complaints. The use of alternative dispute resolution does not have the unpredictability involved when rendering decisions because of traditional resolution of disputes mechanisms. The alternative dispute resolution system operates in a different way as compared to the other systems. The ADR mechanism offers improved communications between the parties that have dispute, which increases workplace morale, ongoing relationships, results in participant work, relationship satisfaction and offers long-lasting solutions (Gillespie, 2007, p 477).