Good Faith, Bad Faith? Making an Effort in Dispute Resolution
The behaviour of those engaged in negotiation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes that are undertaken or required before or after litigation is increasingly the subject of legislative regulation. Recent case law has also more clearly articulated the characteristics of good faith as well as other standards such as 'genuine effort' and explored to a limited extent the behavioural indicators and approaches that could be used to determine the meaning and scope of these types of concepts. Arguably, the growth in mandatory (rather than voluntary) ADR may require the articulation of clearer conduct obligations as ADR participants may be disinclined to negotiate or may be relatively unsophisticated or unaware of their negotiation behaviour. This article explores the development of conduct obligations and notes that whilst the requirements need to be linked to the circumstances of each dispute, there are some clear differences in terms of how these requirements are more generally interpreted by lawyers and others.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).