Two years ago, my sister and I decided to take a trip to São Paulo to attend an event. The outward trip was a complete success; everything went according to plan, and we were able to make the most of the event. However, the return trip was a completely different experience, marked by frustration and disappointment.

The shipping company, which was supposed to ensure a smooth return, failed to provide its services properly. This situation quickly turned into a logistical nightmare. Our efforts to resolve the issue directly with the company were unsuccessful, as the company refused to engage in any kind of dialogue or seek an amicable solution to the problem.

Given the company’s refusal to cooperate, we felt that the only viable option was to file a lawsuit to assert our rights. Unfortunately, this decision set us on a long and winding path. Even though it was a relatively straightforward case, suitable for a small claims court, we are still waiting for the outcome of this lawsuit to this day.

This incident is a clear example of the challenges and frustrations that many people face when they resort to the court system to resolve disputes. Prolonged waiting times do no one any good. In our case, the delay is hurting both us as consumers and the company itself, which is accruing interest on arrears during this entire period.

This experience brought up a crucial question: is the courts always the best option for resolving disputes? The answer is no. There are several other effective ways of resolving disputes that many people are unaware of or hesitate to use. This is where Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (ADR’s) come in.

ADR’s are alternative/appropriate methods of resolving disputes that do not involve the traditional court system. In portuguese, these methods are known as Métodos Adequados de Solução de Conflitos (MASC). They offer faster, more efficient and less confrontational ways of resolving issues.

Among the main ADR methods, the following stand out:

  • Mediation: An impartial mediator helps the parties reach a mutually acceptable agreement.
  • Negotiation: The parties involved negotiate directly to resolve the dispute amicably.
  • Arbitration: An impartial arbitrator makes a binding decision after hearing both parties.

ADR’s offer several benefits over traditional court proceedings. Some of these benefits include:

  • Speed: Mediation, negotiation and arbitration processes are generally faster than court proceedings.
  • Flexibility: ADR’s allow for more flexible solutions adapted to the specific needs of the parties involved.
  • Confidentiality: Unlike legal proceedings, ADR’s can be conducted privately and confidentially.
  • Relationship Preservation: ADR’s tend to be less adversarial, helping to preserve personal and business relationships.

Despite the clear advantages of ADR’s, many people still cling to the court system as the only way to resolve disputes. This mindset needs to change. The longer parties spend in legal disputes, the more harmed they become, both emotionally and financially. Furthermore, companies that refuse to explore ADR’s end up accumulating additional costs, such as late payment interest, that could be avoided.

It is crucial that companies, lawyers and legal practitioners in general familiarize themselves with ADR’s and consider these methods as a viable and preferable alternative to litigation.

ADR’s represent an effective, efficient and less stressful way to resolve disputes, benefiting all parties involved. It is time to change our mindset and seriously consider these alternatives instead of immediately resorting to the courts.

Danielle Farah Ziade . Lawyer. Master in Law (UFMG)