Collaborative law, or collaborative process, as it is sometimes called, is a process for resolving disputes by promoting resolution. Many people have heard of it as a way to resolve divorces, but it also works for resolving civil disputes, sometimes with variations tailored to the needs of a particular case.
- What is Collaborative Law? Collaborative law first emerged as a method of saving parties in divorce cases some of the hostility and cost of the process by maintaining respect in image. Professionals devised a series of steps that increased the likelihood of an interest-based negotiation (rather than a negotiation based on defending extreme positions and bargaining to reach a middle ground) and cooperative problem solving between disputing spouses, which they often have an ongoing problem. childcare or other relationship to preserve. While not all techniques translate to all types of cases, they can make the civil dispute resolution process significantly more efficient.
- How does it work? The Collaborative Process begins when the parties and their attorneys agree in writing to seek a resolution of their dispute outside of the court system. The parties and attorneys set the parameters of their discussions, which often include a set number of initial meetings, joint retention of the necessary neutral experts, the inadmissibility of any of the settlement discussions in court, and a joint commitment to exchange. relevant information freely instead of. than play discovery games.
- How is the lawyer’s job different? In litigation or most commercial mediations, the attorney assumes the primary confrontational role as the client’s primary persuasive spokesperson. He also uses the tools of the system to weaken the opponent’s side and strengthen his client’s. In the collaborative process, attorneys advocate for clients by supporting them in a problem-solving mode. For transactional attorneys, this is not as much of a leap as it is for litigants. For that reason, special collaborative training is better, and is actually starting to make its way into the law school curriculum.
- Disqualification of attorney. To keep the focus on the conference room rather than the courtroom, in a pure collaboration case, the attorneys agree to withdraw in favor of the trial attorney if the case is not resolved. Since this is not always practical, variations have evolved that include the lawyer standing aside but his firm not being disqualified. In this model, an in-house attorney is considered a client and is not asked to step down from representing your company. Again, this is not a huge leap for transactional attorneys.
- Facilitation. In many cases, a specially trained collaborative trainer-facilitator helps manage the process and party communications.
- How the negotiations are carried out. In a non-collaborative case, attorneys often bear much of the burden in offline negotiations or, for a few brief moments, in court. In a collaborative case, most of the work is carried out in joint meetings with carefully designed agendas to advance the agreement negotiation process and encourage interest-based negotiation. The parties themselves are actively involved in this creative problem-solving exercise.
The collaborative dispute resolution process is a highly structured resolution approach aimed at resolving cases faster, with fewer disruptions on both sides, with complete confidentiality, and often at significantly less cost than lengthy litigation. The collaborative approach encourages the parties to move beyond entrenched positions while giving them the flexibility to design a personalized settlement beyond the limited range of solutions available in court. It is a different and less hostile way to approach a disagreement even after attorneys have been hired.