Amicable dispute settlement methods play a major role in the resolution of civil and commercial disputes. These mechanisms present advantages to the parties as compared to arbitration and litigation. The Civil Code of 1960 contains provisions on Conciliation and Compromise, which set out the minimum legal framework for practical use by disputing parties in civil and commercial matters. Conciliation and compromise are in the main regulated under Arts. 3318-3324 and 3307-3317 respectively. The Civil Procedure Code of 1965 also consists of several provisions on compromise (Arts. 274-277). Generally, disputes are legally and conveniently amenable and better resolved through these amicable dispute settlement methods. However, whether they are put in use entirely depends on the free will of the disputing parties‟. They can only be resorted to whenever the disputing parties commit themselves to use them in their contractual agreements. For certain other disputes, these amicable dispute settlement mechanisms are compulsory; in such cases, policy rationale dictates that disputes of such nature should be swiftly resolved through amicable dispute settlement methods. Some other disputes are, however, vested exclusively in the courts. This article distinguishes arbitration from conciliation. It is discussed whether conciliation differs from mediation. Attempt has also been made to shed light on the nature and application of concilioarbitration in Ethiopia. The legal framework underpinning negotiation, conciliation, and compromise is expounded. Furthermore, the legal lacunae in relation to conciliation is addressed.

Keyterms: Amicable dispute settlement methods play a major role in the resolution of civil and commercial disputes. These mechanisms present advantages to the parties as compared to arbitration and litigation. The Civil Code of 1960 contains provisions on Conciliation and Compromise, which set out the minimum legal framework for practical use by disputing parties in civil and commercial matters. Conciliation and compromise are in the main regulated under Arts. 3318-3324 and 3307-3317 respectively. The Civil Procedure Code of 1965 also consists of several provisions on compromise (Arts. 274-277). Generally, disputes are legally and conveniently amenable and better resolved through these amicable dispute settlement methods. However, whether they are put in use entirely depends on the free will of the disputing parties‟. They can only be resorted to whenever the disputing parties commit themselves to use them in their contractual agreements. For certain other disputes, these amicable dispute settlement mechanisms are compulsory; in such cases, policy rationale dictates that disputes of such nature should be swiftly resolved through amicable dispute settlement methods. Some other disputes are, however, vested exclusively in the courts. This article distinguishes arbitration from conciliation. It is discussed whether conciliation differs from mediation. Attempt has also been made to shed light on the nature and application of concilioarbitration in Ethiopia. The legal framework underpinning negotiation, conciliation, and compromise is expounded. Furthermore, the legal lacunae in relation to conciliation is addressed.

Projects

Currently no objects available

Currently no objects available