2,667
edits
Difference between revisions of "Changing Family Law Agreements"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Amending an agreement through negotiation
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
A well-written agreement will usually provide a way for the parties to resolve disputes arising from the agreement. Sometimes this mechanism requires that the parties go to court; sometimes this mechanism prescribes some other means of dispute resolution like mediation or arbitration. | A well-written agreement will usually provide a way for the parties to resolve disputes arising from the agreement. Sometimes this mechanism requires that the parties go to court; sometimes this mechanism prescribes some other means of dispute resolution like mediation or arbitration. | ||
Mediation is, in general, the best option if simple negotiation doesn't get you anywhere. In mediation, the parties attempt to negotiate a resolution to their dispute with the help of a third party, the mediator, who is skilled in family law issues and works with the parties to get them to a new agreement. | Mediation is, in general, the best option if simple negotiation doesn't get you anywhere. In mediation, the parties attempt to negotiate a resolution to their dispute with the help of a neutral <span class="noglossary">third party</span>, the mediator, who is skilled in family law issues and works with the parties to get them to a new agreement. | ||
Mediation is not always appropriate, particularly where the problem is limited to one particular term of the agreement and it seems that neither party is willing to bend on the matter. In such cases, arbitration limited to that one issue should be considered. The job of an arbitrator is to listen to the evidence and the arguments and then make a <span class="noglossary">decision</span>, called an ''award'', that resolves the dispute and is binding on the parties. It is always faster to arbitrate than to litigate, and when both parties have lawyers it's usually cheaper to arbitrate as well. | Mediation is not always appropriate, particularly where the problem is limited to one particular term of the agreement and it seems that neither party is willing to bend on the matter. In such cases, arbitration limited to that one issue should be considered. The job of an arbitrator is to listen to the evidence and the arguments and then make a <span class="noglossary">decision</span>, called an ''award'', that resolves the dispute and is binding on the parties. It is always faster to arbitrate than to litigate, and when both parties have lawyers it's usually cheaper to arbitrate as well. | ||