RUNNING ORDER OF THE CONFERENCE
I. Models of ADR: The Research Findings - Revealing the Hidden World of Consumer ADR in Slovenia, Poland, Sweden, France, Germany, the UK, and the Netherlands
II. Redress through ADR: In what circumstances does ADR work – and work best?
- What criteria should ADR satisfy: independence, expertise, fundamental rights, due process, fairness, justice, legitimacy, governance, effectiveness, efficiency, speed, cost, flexibility – and access to justice? Are these the ‘minimum standards’ needed for ADR? Why? Are there others?
- Where do contrasting ADR models not satisfy the criteria? How should systems be improved?
- Should decisions be fully transparent?
- What is the best architecture for ADR – nationally and internationally?
- How do developments in consumer ADR relate to systems and developments in public sector oversight and dispute resolution?
- How do we measure the function and success of ADR schemes?
- Professor Deborah Hensler, Stanford Law School
III. Where Next?
- Improvements in ADR techniques
- What opportunities exist to extend ADR?
- Should ADR deliver behaviour control (improvements in performance through scrutiny and regulation) as well as dispute resolution? How can regulators, business and consumers deliver redress, dispute resolution and improved standards?
- Why do we need courts? What for? What role should ADR, regulators and courts have, and how should they work together?
- Malcolm Carlisle OBE, European Justice Forum
- Panel discussion: How should ADR be developed nationally, across the EU and beyond? What are the implications for access to justice?
- Pula Houghton, Which?, London
- Keith Richards, Raleo Ltd, London
- Sebastian Bohr, European Commission DG SANCO, Brussels
- Peter Avery, OECD, Paris