Dealing with a construction dispute may be a fraught situation for your company and your bottom line. Generally, litigation is expensive and may take up a lot of your valuable time. Plus, it has the potential to ruin worthwhile business relationships.
In some instances, it may be a better choice to pursue arbitration over traditional litigation if it is possible. According to FindLaw, arbitration and litigation have many things in common, but arbitration may be cheaper and faster.
What is arbitration?
The process of arbitration looks very similar to litigation. In most cases, instead of a singular judge, there will be a panel of arbitrators. Typically, one party picks the first arbitrator, the other party picks the second and both parties agree upon the third.
Arbitration can then proceed much like litigation. It is possible to involve lawyers to represent the parties if they desire this. Once both sides of the dispute present their “case,” the arbitrators will then discuss and hand down a resolution.
What makes arbitration a better choice?
Arbitration can be much faster than litigation, as you likely will not need as much time to assemble a panel as waiting for a judge to hear your case. Depending on the case itself, having arbitrators who are familiar with the construction industry can also be helpful. Most judges will not know the construction industry and its specifics as well as a hand-picked arbitrator.
In some instances, arbitration is the more cost-effective and speedy option for handling contract disputes. This can solve the dispute and help get you back to work.