As an extension of ADR, a new practice called “HYBRID ADR” has recently come into practice. Hybrid ADR means nothing but combining various traditional methods of dispute resolution to suit the different needs and preferences of various parties. This can be a useful approach particularly when the dispute is complex and requires a more tailored solution than what traditional ADR methods offer.
For example, in a hybrid mediation-arbitration process, the parties first attempt to resolve their dispute through mediation, but if they are unable to reach an agreement, the mediator will become the arbitrator and make a binding decision on the dispute. In a hybrid negotiation-arbitration process, the parties first attempt to negotiate a settlement but if they cannot agree, they will move to arbitration and if the arbitration also doesn’t succeed, the parties can move into litigation.
Hybrid ADR can offer several benefits over traditional ADR methods. Firstly, it can be more flexible, allowing parties to customize the process to their needs. Secondly, it can save time and money, as parties can avoid a lengthy court process by resolving their dispute through ADR. Finally, it can be more effective, as it allows parties to use a range of methods to achieve a resolution that works for them.
However, hybrid ADR also has some potential drawbacks. The process can become more complex and confusing if parties are not familiar with the different ADR methods. Additionally, parties may not agree on the order or combination of ADR methods to use, which can lead to delays and impasses.
Overall, we can say that hybrid ADR is an innovative approach to resolving disputes that allows parties to tailor the process to their needs, and can result in more efficient, effective, and satisfactory outcomes.