Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Nepal: Mediation vs. Litigation

1. Introduction to Alternative Dispute Resolution

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to structured processes for resolving disputes outside traditional court litigation. In Nepal's legal system, ADR has become increasingly important as courts face severe backlogs and citizens seek faster, more cost-effective dispute resolution methods.

The history of ADR in Nepal reflects broader global trends. While formal litigation has been the traditional mechanism for resolving civil disputes, the Nepal government and legal community have recognized that courts alone cannot meet the demand for dispute resolution services. This recognition has led to development and promotion of ADR mechanisms.

Why ADR is Growing in Nepal

Several factors have driven ADR's expansion:

Judicial Bottlenecks: Nepal's courts are severely backlogged. Cases routinely take 2-5 years or longer to resolve. This delay damages parties and their relationships.

Cost Burden: Court litigation is expensive. Lawyer fees, court costs, expert witnesses, and time investments make litigation inaccessible to many Nepali citizens.

Social Impact: Prolonged disputes damage family relationships, business partnerships, and community harmony. ADR methods that preserve relationships have social benefits.

Economic Development: Businesses require predictable, rapid dispute resolution. ADR provides this, making Nepal more attractive for investment.

International Standards: Nepal's integration into international commerce requires adoption of dispute resolution methods recognized internationally, particularly arbitration.

Constitutional Access to Justice: The Constitution of Nepal, 2072 guarantees right to justice. ADR expands access by providing faster, cheaper alternatives.

Scope of ADR in Nepal

ADR encompasses various mechanisms:

Negotiation: Direct discussion between parties

Mediation: Neutral facilitator helps parties reach agreement

Conciliation: Conciliator proposes solutions

Arbitration: Private arbitrator makes binding decision

Adjudication in Administrative Bodies: Some government offices resolve disputes

Each mechanism has distinct characteristics, advantages, and limitations. The choice depends on dispute nature, parties' needs, and relationship preservation goals.

---

2. Overview of ADR Mechanisms

Negotiation

Definition: Direct discussion between disputing parties aimed at reaching mutually acceptable solution

Process:

1. Parties communicate directly
2. Each party explains position
3. Parties explore common ground
4. Parties work toward compromise
5. If agreement reached, documented and implemented

Characteristics:

• Simplest form of ADR
• No third party involved
• Fully controlled by parties
• Most informal
• Can occur anytime

Best For:

• Simple disputes
• Parties willing to compromise
• Strong ongoing relationships
• Quick resolution needed

Limitations:

• No neutral facilitator
• Power imbalances may prevent fair agreement
• Emotions may escalate conflict
• Difficult if relationship is hostile

Mediation

Definition: Neutral mediator facilitates discussion to help parties reach voluntary agreement

Process:

1. Mediator is selected
2. Mediation process explained
3. Parties present positions
4. Mediator identifies common ground
5. Separate caucuses with each party
6. Mediator proposes solutions
7. If agreement, documented

Characteristics:

• Neutral third party (mediator)
• Non-binding unless parties agree
• Flexible procedures
• Confidential process
• Parties maintain control over outcome

Best For:

• Disputes where relationships matter
• Complex disputes requiring facilitation
• Power imbalances need neutrality
• Faster resolution desired
• Cost-conscious parties

Advantages:

• Preserves relationships
• Creative solutions possible
• Faster than litigation
• Less costly than litigation
• High settlement rate

Arbitration

Definition: Private arbitrator hears case and issues binding decision (award)

Process:

1. Parties select arbitrator(s)
2. Arbitration agreement is formalized
3. Parties present evidence and arguments
4. Arbitrator hears case
5. Arbitrator issues binding award
6. Award is enforceable in court

Characteristics:

• Binding decision (not appealable in normal sense)
• Formal proceedings
• Private process
• Limited discovery
• Expert arbitrator

Best For:

• Commercial disputes
• Parties want binding decision
• Confidentiality is important
• Technical expertise needed
• Defined legal issues

Advantages:

• Binding decision eliminates uncertainty
• Faster than court litigation
• Confidential process
• Expert decision-maker
• Limited appeal rights

Conciliation

Definition: Conciliator actively proposes solutions to help parties reach agreement

Process:

1. Conciliator is selected
2. Parties present their positions
3. Conciliator asks questions and gathers information
4. Conciliator proposes specific solutions
5. Parties respond to proposals
6. Refinement of proposals
7. If agreement, documented

Characteristics:

• Active third-party involvement
• Proposal-focused
• Between mediation and arbitration
• Often used in labor disputes
• Flexible but structured

Best For:

• Labor disputes
• Government-citizen disputes
• Complex technical matters requiring expert input
• Parties need guidance toward solution

---

3. Traditional Litigation: Understanding Court Processes

To properly compare ADR with litigation, it's important to understand court litigation processes.

Structure of Nepal's Court System

District Courts (First Instance):

• Handle all civil cases initially
• 75 district courts across Nepal
• Judges appointed from bar and academics
• Cases heard in public

High Courts (Appellate):

• Five regional high courts
• Hear appeals from district courts
• Review for legal error
• Appellate judges (usually 2-3 judges per case)

Supreme Court (Highest):

• Reviews constitutional and major legal questions
• Limited appeals
• 14 justices
• Final authority

Court Litigation Timeline

Typical Civil Case Timeline:

Court Costs

Filing Fees:

• Based on claim value using progressive scale
• Small claims: NPR 500-5,000
• Large claims: 1-2% of claim value
• Special court orders may have additional fees

Lawyer Fees:

• Hourly rate: NPR 500-2,000+ per hour
• Flat fee: NPR 50,000-500,000+ for case
• Contingency: 20-40% of recovery
• Total lawyer cost: NPR 100,000-1,000,000+ depending on case complexity

Other Costs:

• Court costs: NPR 5,000-25,000
• Document certification: NPR 1,000-5,000
• Expert witnesses: NPR 50,000-200,000+
• Travel and miscellaneous: NPR 10,000-50,000

Total Litigation Cost: NPR 200,000-1,500,000+ depending on case complexity and duration

Court Litigation Advantages

Legal Certainty: Judgment establishes legally binding determination

Appellate Review: Decisions can be appealed for legal error review

Enforcement Power: Court judgments are enforceable through court machinery

Precedent Value: Published decisions set precedent for future cases

Public Accountability: Court proceedings are public record

Court Litigation Disadvantages

Cost: Expensive for parties (lawyer fees, court costs, expert witnesses, opportunity costs)

Time: Cases take years to resolve, delaying relief for injured parties

Predictability: Outcomes are unpredictable due to subjective judge interpretation

Adversarial Nature: Process creates winners and losers, damaging relationships

Publicity: Public proceedings expose disputes to public scrutiny

Limited Flexibility: Strict procedural rules and evidence rules may prevent justice

Emotional Toll: Prolonged litigation creates ongoing stress for parties

---

4. Mediation: Facilitated Negotiation

Mediation has become the most popular ADR method in Nepal and is now mandatory in most civil cases before trial.

Mediation in Nepal: Legal Framework

Mediation Act 2068 (2011) is the primary legislation governing mediation in Nepal.

Objectives of Mediation Act (Section 2):

• To provide expedited dispute settlement
• To reduce costs of dispute resolution
• To make process simple and accessible
• To preserve relationships
• To increase party satisfaction

Mandatory Mediation Requirement:

Civil Procedure Code 2074, Sections 193-195 require that all civil cases must attempt mediation before proceeding to trial:

• Court orders mediation at first hearing
• 30-day mediation period is given
• Both parties must participate in good faith
• Mediator is court-appointed from mediation center

This mandatory mediation requirement has dramatically increased mediation's use in Nepal.

Mediation Process Detailed

Step 1: Mediator Selection

Court-Appointed Mediation:

• Court refers case to mediation center
• Mediator is assigned from center's panel
• Mediator's qualifications verified
• Parties receive mediator information

Private Mediation:

• Parties jointly select mediator
• Mediator must be trained and qualified
• Registered with Mediation Council
• Experience in dispute type important

Mediator Qualifications (per Mediation Act 2068):

• Mediation training certificate
• At least 20 hours training
• Registered with Mediation Council or local government
• Ethical commitment to impartiality
• Knowledge of relevant substantive law
• Communication and facilitation skills

Step 2: Mediation Opening

Mediator's Introductory Remarks:

• Explains mediation process and objectives
• Emphasizes voluntary nature (parties can withdraw)
• Confirms mediator's impartiality
• Establishes ground rules (respect, confidentiality, etc.)
• Asks if parties willing to proceed

Ground Rules Typically Include:

• Respect and civility toward all parties
• One person speaks at a time
• No interruptions during opening statements
• Confidentiality of mediation discussions
• Good faith participation

Step 3: Parties' Opening Statements

Plaintiff/Claimant Opening:

• Explains their position
• Describes what happened
• Explains harm or loss suffered
• States what they want as resolution
• Usually 15-30 minutes

Defendant/Respondent Opening:

• Presents their understanding
• Explains their position
• Addresses plaintiff's allegations
• States their view of fair resolution
• Usually 15-30 minutes

Mediator's Role:

• Listens without interrupting
• Takes notes on key issues
• Identifies commonalities and differences
• Listens for underlying interests (not just stated positions)

Step 4: Joint Discussion

After opening statements:

• Parties may respond to each other
• Mediator poses clarifying questions
• Parties explore issues together
• Mediator helps identify common ground
• Discussion may be free-flowing or mediator-directed

Mediator's Techniques:

• "Tell me more about..." (open-ended questions)
• "How would that work?" (practical questions)
• "What concerns you most?" (interest identification)
• "Is there any basis you could both accept?" (reality testing)

Step 5: Private Caucuses

Most mediation includes private meetings between mediator and each party:

Caucus with Party A:

• Mediator meets with Party A alone
• Party can speak candidly without other side hearing
• Mediator listens to concerns, fears, constraints
• Mediator tests whether party is willing to compromise
• Mediator may suggest alternative positions

Caucus with Party B:

• Same process with other party
• Mediator learns their position and flexibility
• Mediator gathers information about possible settlements
• Mediator looks for areas of agreement

Benefits of Caucuses:

• Parties can be honest without public admission
• Mediator understands actual constraints (financial, relational, etc.)
• Positions can be softened through mediator's shuttle diplomacy
• Mediator can identify settlement range

Step 6: Facilitated Negotiation

Based on caucus information, mediator facilitates negotiation:

Mediator's Role:

• Identifies areas of agreement
• Explains each side's perspective to other
• Proposes compromise positions
• Explains benefits of settlement
• Reality-tests positions
• Encourages creative solutions

Parties' Role:

• Respond to mediator's proposals
• Suggest alternatives
• Gradually move from extreme positions toward middle ground
• Eventually (if successful) agree on settlement

Creative Solutions in Mediation:

Unlike litigation (which results in winner/loser), mediation allows creative solutions:

• Phased payment over time
• Performance instead of payment
• Apology combined with compensation
• Continued relationship with modified terms
• Non-monetary remedies
• Future cooperation arrangements

Example: In contract dispute, rather than damages payment, mediator might suggest:

• Defendant corrects work without charge
• Plaintiff pays discounted price (instead of full price)
• Both agree to future business cooperation

Step 7: Settlement Agreement

If Agreement Reached:

Documentation:

• Mediator documents agreement
• Agreement is written and specific
• Clear obligations are stated
• Payment terms (if any) are specified
• Timeline for performance is included
• Dispute resolution if future issues arise

Verification:

• Both parties review agreement
• Both parties confirm understanding
• Both parties sign agreement
• Mediator signs as witness
• Dated and dated by all parties

Sample Settlement Agreement Language:

"SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

This settlement agreement is entered into on [date] between [Party A] and [Party B] to resolve the dispute regarding [subject of dispute].

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to resolve their dispute through mediation, and

WHEREAS, the parties have reached the following agreement:

1. Defendant acknowledges owing NPR 500,000 to Plaintiff for [specific reason]

2. Defendant agrees to pay this amount in two installments:

• First installment: NPR 250,000 on [date]
• Second installment: NPR 250,000 on [date]

3. Both parties agree that payment of this amount satisfies all claims between them regarding [subject].

4. Both parties agree to cease any legal proceedings regarding this dispute.

Signed this [date]:

[Party A Signature] [Party B Signature] [Mediator Signature]"*

Court Approval:

• If mediation was court-referred, agreement goes to court
• Court reviews agreement for legality
• Court approves (making it enforceable as court order)
• Case is dismissed

If Mediation Fails:

Mediator's Termination Report:

• Mediator reports to court that agreement not reached
• Reports do NOT disclose party positions or communications
• Case proceeds to trial
• Settlement discussions are not admissible in subsequent trial

Confidentiality Protection:

• Nothing said in mediation can be used against party in court
• Mediator cannot testify about mediation
• Protected by mediation privilege
• Encourages candid discussion during mediation

Mediation Timeline

Typical Mediation Timeline:

Mediation Outcomes

Statistics on Mediation Success:

In Nepal, court-annexed mediation has:

• Settlement rate: 60-75% of cases
• Average settlement time: 30-45 days
• Cost reduction: 70-80% less than litigation
• Party satisfaction: High (parties feel heard)

Factors Contributing to Success:

• Parties willing to compromise
• Mediator's skill and experience
• Substantive agreement possible (not purely legal dispute)
• Relationship factors motivate settlement
• Financial constraints favor settlement

Factors Contributing to Failure:

• One party unwilling to compromise
• Parties seeking vindication, not settlement
• Extreme power imbalance
• Mediator lacks necessary skills
• Parties unlikely to comply with agreement

---

5. Arbitration: Private Adjudication

Arbitration is a more formal ADR process in which a private arbitrator issues binding decision.

Arbitration in Nepal: Legal Framework

Arbitration Act 2055 (1999) is the primary legislation:

Scope (Section 3): "If any agreement provides for settlement of disputes through arbitration, disputes arising from that agreement shall be settled through arbitration according to the procedure prescribed."

Key Features:

• Party autonomy (parties control process)
• Limited court involvement
• Final and binding awards
• Enforcement mechanisms
• International recognition (Nepal ratified New York Convention on Enforcement of Arbitral Awards)

Arbitration Process Detailed

Step 1: Arbitration Agreement

When Required:

• Parties must have agreed to arbitrate disputes
• Agreement can be in contract clause or separate agreement
• Called "arbitration clause" in contracts

Sample Arbitration Clause:

"Any dispute arising out of or relating to this agreement shall be settled by arbitration. The arbitration shall be conducted in Kathmandu, Nepal according to the Arbitration Act 2055. The arbitration award shall be final and binding on both parties."

Enforceability:

• Courts must enforce valid arbitration agreements
• If case is filed in court, defendant can request court refer to arbitration
• Arbitration agreement takes precedence over court jurisdiction

Step 2: Arbitrator Selection

Number of Arbitrators:

• Agreement specifies number (usually 1 or 3)
• Single arbitrator for smaller disputes
• Three-arbitrator tribunal for larger/complex disputes

Arbitrator Selection Process:

For Single Arbitrator:

1. Parties agree on arbitrator
2. If no agreement, each party nominates one person
3. Those two persons select third person (who becomes arbitrator)
4. If no agreement on third person, Arbitration Council appoints

For Three-Arbitrator Tribunal:

1. Each party selects one arbitrator
2. Those two arbitrators select third (called "presiding arbitrator")
3. Presiding arbitrator chairs tribunal
4. If arbitrators cannot agree on third, Arbitration Council appoints

Arbitrator Qualifications:

• Legal knowledge (preferably lawyer)
• Industry/technical expertise (if relevant)
• Impartiality and integrity
• Experience in arbitration
• Knowledge of relevant law

Conflict of Interest:

• Arbitrator must disclose any conflicts
• Must be independent and impartial
• Parties can challenge arbitrator for bias
• Arbitrator can be replaced if conflict shown

Step 3: Arbitration Agreement and Procedural Rules

Procedural Framework: Parties can agree on:

• Language (Nepali or English)
• Place of arbitration
• Applicable law
• Evidence rules
• Timeline for proceedings
• Cost allocation

Default Rules:

• If not specified, arbitration follows Arbitration Act provisions
• Arbitrator may establish procedures

Step 4: Notice and Commencement

Claimant's Notice:

• Party initiating arbitration (claimant) sends notice
• To respondent (other party)
• Notice states dispute details
• Relief sought
• Arbitrator selection proposal

Respondent's Response:

• Respondent responds to claimant's notice
• States their position
• Nominates arbitrator (if applicable)
• Submits preliminary statements

Formal Commencement:

• Arbitration is deemed commenced when respondent receives notice
• Timeline begins for arbitrator appointment
• Process starts

Step 5: Preliminary Hearing

Many arbitrations begin with preliminary hearing:

Issues Addressed:

• Confirmation arbitrators' appointment and impartiality
• Clarification of scope of dispute
• Schedule for proceedings
• Procedural rules to be followed
• Exchange of documents
• Witness list and expert witnesses

Preliminary Awards:

• May decide purely legal issues upfront
• Can streamline later proceedings

Step 6: Evidence and Submissions

Written Submissions:

• Claimant submits detailed statement of claim
• Respondent submits defense statement
• Each party submits supporting documents
• Expert reports submitted

Witness Evidence:

• Witness statements from each party
• Live testimony at hearing (sometimes)
• Cross-examination by other party

Documentary Evidence:

• Contracts and agreements
• Correspondence between parties
• Financial records
• Expert reports
• Technical documents

Expert Witnesses:

• Technical experts explain complex matters
• May be party experts or tribunal-appointed
• Subject to cross-examination

Step 7: Arbitration Hearing

Hearing Structure (if held):

• Claimant presents case
• Claimant's witnesses testify
• Respondent cross-examines
• Respondent presents case
• Respondent's witnesses testify
• Claimant cross-examines
• Closing arguments

Confidentiality:

• Arbitration proceedings are private
• Parties and arbitrators bound by confidentiality
• Hearing not open to public
• Protects sensitive business information

Duration:

• Single-day to multi-day hearings
• Depends on dispute complexity
• Shorter than court trials

Step 8: Arbitral Award

Timeline for Award:

• Per Arbitration Act Section 20, award must be made within 120 days of commencement
• Can be extended by agreement
• Can be extended by arbitrator for good cause

Contents of Award:

• Factual findings
• Legal analysis
• Application of law to facts
• Decision on each claim
• Reasoning for decision
• Award amount (if monetary)
• Cost allocation
• Arbitrator signature(s)

Unanimity or Majority:

• Single arbitrator signs alone
• Three-arbitrator tribunal: majority vote prevails
• Dissenting arbitrators can record dissenting opinion
• Final award is issued and signed

Finality:

• Award is final and binding
• Generally not appealable
• Cannot re-litigate same issues
• Limited grounds to challenge award

Arbitration Timeline

Typical Arbitration Timeline:

Arbitration Costs

Arbitrator Fees:

• Varies by arbitrator experience and time
• Typical: NPR 50,000-200,000+ per arbitrator
• Three arbitrators: NPR 150,000-600,000+ total
• Time-based or fixed fee

Administrative Costs:

• If through arbitration center: NPR 20,000-50,000
• If private arbitration: minimal

Lawyer Fees:

• Hourly rate: NPR 500-2,000+ per hour
• Total: NPR 100,000-500,000+ depending on case

Total Arbitration Cost: NPR 200,000-800,000+ depending on complexity

---

6. Conciliation: Active Third-Party Intervention

Conciliation is similar to mediation but involves more active participation by conciliator.

Conciliation Process

Differences from Mediation:

• Conciliator is more directive
• Conciliator proposes specific solutions
• Process is more structured
• More formal than mediation
• Often used in labor disputes

Conciliation Stages:

1. Investigation: Conciliator investigates dispute
2. Fact-Finding: Gathers information from parties
3. Recommendation: Proposes specific solutions
4. Negotiation: Helps parties move toward recommendation
5. Agreement: If parties agree, documented and implemented

Labor Dispute Conciliation in Nepal

Labor Act 2017 provides for conciliation in labor disputes:

Process:

1. Dispute arises between employer and employee
2. Parties attempt direct settlement
3. If unsuccessful, referred to Labor Office
4. Labor Office appoints conciliator
5. Conciliator investigates and proposes solution
6. Parties negotiate based on proposal
7. If successful, agreement is binding

Common Labor Disputes Resolved Through Conciliation:

• Wage disputes
• Wrongful termination claims
• Working conditions complaints
• Leave entitlements
• Discrimination claims

---

7. Negotiation: Direct Settlement

Negotiation is the simplest form of ADR involving direct communication between parties.

Negotiation Process

Without Mediator:

1. Parties communicate directly
2. Exchange positions
3. Identify common interests
4. Work toward compromise
5. Document any agreement

With Lawyer as Negotiator:

1. Lawyers communicate on behalf of clients
2. Propose settlement positions
3. Counter-propose
4. Gradually move to common ground
5. Prepare settlement agreement

Negotiation Advantages

Cost: Minimal cost (only lawyer fees if used)

Speed: Can be completed quickly

Control: Parties completely control outcome

Relationship: Preserves direct communication

Negotiation Limitations

Lack of Neutrality: No neutral person to test fairness

Power Imbalance: Stronger party may dominate

Escalation Risk: If emotions high, negotiation can deteriorate

Impasse: May reach deadlock without resolution

---

8. Legal Framework for ADR in Nepal

Primary ADR Legislation

Arbitration Act 2055 (1999)

• Governs arbitration proceedings
• Provides framework for arbitrator appointment
• Specifies award procedures
• Addresses enforcement

Mediation Act 2068 (2011)

• Governs mediation procedures
• Establishes Mediation Council
• Sets mediator qualifications
• Promotes court-annexed mediation

Civil Procedure Code 2074

• Sections 193-195: Mandatory mediation before trial
• 30-day mediation period required
• Court appoints mediator
• Settlement prevents litigation

Labor Act 2017

• Conciliation for labor disputes
• Labor Office coordinates
• Binding if agreed

Contract Act 2056

• Recognizes arbitration and mediation agreements
• Enforces ADR clauses in contracts

Key Constitutional Provisions

Constitution of Nepal 2072:

Article 33: Right to constitutional remedies Article 40: Right to fair trial Article 47: Right to justice

These constitutional provisions support ADR as mechanism for fulfilling right to justice.

Institutions Supporting ADR

Mediation Council:

• Apex body for mediation
• Approves mediator training
• Maintains mediator registry
• Sets mediator standards
• Monitors quality

Nepal Arbitration Council (NEPCA):

• Appoints arbitrators
• Administers arbitration
• Maintains arbitrator registry
• Enforces awards

District Court Mediation Centers:

• Established by courts
• Provide court-annexed mediation
• Trained mediators
• Low or no cost

---

9. Comparative Analysis: Mediation vs. Litigation

Control Over Process

Mediation:

• Parties control process
• Flexible procedures
• Parties set timeline
• Parties determine scope

Litigation:

• Judge controls process
• Fixed procedures
• Court sets calendar
• Scope defined by law

Advantage: Mediation provides more party control

Control Over Outcome

Mediation:

• Parties control outcome
• Agreement reflects mutual interest
• Creative solutions possible
• Settlement must satisfy both

Litigation:

• Judge determines outcome
• Winner-loser result
• Limited remedy options
• One party dissatisfied

Advantage: Mediation allows parties more input on result

Certainty of Outcome

Mediation:

• Parties achieve certainty through agreement
• Both parties must accept
• No appeals possible
• Final upon agreement

Litigation:

• Uncertain pending trial
• Judge's view unpredictable
• Appeals possible
• Can take years for final resolution

Advantage: Mediation provides faster certainty; litigation may provide legal certainty eventually

Preservation of Relationships

Mediation:

• Focused on relationships
• Parties work together toward solution
• Communication encouraged
• Often preserves ongoing relationship

Litigation:

• Adversarial process
• Parties opposed throughout
• Communication through lawyers only
• Often damages relationships

Advantage: Mediation strongly preserves relationships

Confidentiality

Mediation:

• Completely confidential
• Mediation discussions not admissible in court
• Protected by privilege
• Settlement terms can be made confidential
• Sensitive information stays private

Litigation:

• Public proceedings
• Records available to public
• Witnesses testify in open court
• Sensitive information exposed
• Testimony can be reported

Advantage: Mediation provides confidentiality; litigation is public

Expertise of Decision-Maker

Mediation:

• Mediator has dispute resolution skills
• May or may not have technical expertise
• Skill is facilitation, not decision-making
• Parties are decision-makers

Litigation:

• Judge has legal training
• May or may not have technical expertise
• Must understand both law and facts
• Judge makes final decision

Advantage: Arbitration provides technical expertise; litigation provides legal expertise; mediation relies on parties

Applicable Law

Mediation:

• Parties not bound by law
• Can reach agreement contrary to law
• Law is not focus
• Fairness determined by parties

Litigation:

• Judge applies law
• Decisions must follow legal principles
• Legal precedent controls
• Rule of law governs

Advantage: Litigation ensures legal conformity

Time to Resolution

Mediation:

• 1-2 months (typical)
• 30-day court-ordered period
• Can be extended if progressing
• Faster than litigation

Litigation:

• 1.5-3 years (simple cases)
• 3-8+ years (complex cases)
• Multiple appeals extend timeline
• Much slower than ADR

Advantage: Mediation is dramatically faster

Cost

Mediation:

• Court-annexed mediation: minimal to free
• Private mediation: NPR 20,000-100,000
• Lawyer fees (if used): NPR 50,000-200,000
• Total: NPR 20,000-300,000 (typical)

Litigation:

• Court fees: NPR 5,000-50,000
• Lawyer fees: NPR 100,000-1,000,000+
• Expert witnesses: NPR 50,000-300,000
• Other costs: NPR 50,000-200,000
• Total: NPR 200,000-1,500,000+ (typical)

Advantage: Mediation is significantly cheaper

Appeal and Modification Options

Mediation:

• No appeals (settlement is final)
• Cannot modify without both parties' agreement
• Provides finality
• No re-litigation possible

Litigation:

• Appeals available on legal grounds
• High Court reviews
• Supreme Court may review
• Can drag on for years

Advantage: Mediation provides finality; litigation allows appeals but extends timeline

---

10. Cost Comparison: ADR Methods vs. Court Litigation

Detailed Cost Analysis

Negotiation:

• Mediator fees: None (parties negotiate directly)
• Lawyer fees: Minimal (if used at all)
• Other costs: Minimal
• Total: NPR 0-50,000

Mediation:

• Court-appointed mediator: Free (court pays)
• Private mediator: NPR 20,000-100,000
• Lawyer fees: NPR 50,000-200,000 (if used)
• Other costs: NPR 5,000-20,000
• Total: NPR 25,000-320,000

Arbitration:

• Arbitrator fees: NPR 50,000-600,000 (depending on complexity)
• Lawyer fees: NPR 100,000-500,000
• Administrative costs: NPR 10,000-50,000
• Other costs: NPR 20,000-50,000
• Total: NPR 180,000-1,200,000

Court Litigation:

• Court filing fees: NPR 5,000-50,000
• Lawyer fees: NPR 100,000-1,000,000+
• Expert witnesses: NPR 50,000-300,000
• Document preparation: NPR 10,000-30,000
• Travel and miscellaneous: NPR 50,000-100,000
• Total: NPR 215,000-1,480,000+

Cost Savings from ADR

ADR methods typically provide cost savings of:

• 30-50% vs. litigation (for mediation)
• 20-40% vs. litigation (for arbitration)
• 70-80% vs. litigation (for negotiation)

Hidden Costs of Litigation

Beyond direct costs, litigation has hidden costs:

• Opportunity costs: Time management and distraction from business
• Stress costs: Emotional toll of prolonged dispute
• Relationship costs: Damage to business relationships
• Reputational costs: Public exposure of business disputes

---

11. Timeline Comparison: Speed of Resolution

Speed Analysis

Key Timeline Differences

Mediation Speed:

• Mandatory 30-day period
• If progress, mediation can extend
• Most settlements within 6-8 weeks
• Dramatically faster than litigation

Arbitration Speed:

• 120 days from commencement to award
• Can be faster with fast-track arbitration
• Still must complete investigation and hearing
• Much faster than litigation appeals

Litigation Speed:

• Initial stages relatively fast (2-3 months)
• Trial preparation is lengthy (3-6 months)
• Trial itself can take months
• Judgment issuance adds 1-3 months
• Appeals add 6-18+ months per level

---

12. Confidentiality and Privacy Considerations

Confidentiality in Different Methods

Mediation:

• Strictly confidential
• Mediation discussions protected by privilege
• Cannot be disclosed in court
• Settlement terms can be made confidential
• Ideal for sensitive business matters

Arbitration:

• Confidential proceedings
• Hearing not open to public
• Award is private (though enforcement may be public)
• Protects business secrets
• Not suitable for precedent-setting cases

Negotiation:

• Completely confidential
• Between parties only
• No public record
• Maximum privacy

Litigation:

• Public proceedings
• Court records available
• Testimony on public record
• Media coverage possible
• No privacy protection

When Confidentiality Matters

Confidentiality is important when:

• Trade secrets are involved
• Business strategy is confidential
• Client relationships must be protected
• Industry information is sensitive
• Company reputation is at stake

When Public Process is Important

Public process is important when:

• Setting legal precedent is goal
• Public interest is involved
• Judicial review is valuable
• Appeal rights are necessary
• Vindication is important

---

13. Binding vs. Non-Binding Outcomes

Non-Binding Outcomes

Mediation:

• Settlement agreement is binding (if parties agree)
• Mediation process itself is non-binding
• Party can withdraw at any time
• Mediator cannot impose solution

Negotiation:

• Any agreement is binding
• Process is non-binding
• Either party can withdraw
• No third party enforcement

Benefits of Non-Binding Processes:

• Parties can exit if unfavorable
• No forced settlement
• Voluntary agreement has higher compliance
• Reduces litigation risk

Risks of Non-Binding Processes:

• May fail to produce settlement
• Time and cost may be wasted
• Party may unreasonably refuse settlement

Binding Outcomes

Arbitration:

• Award is final and binding
• Parties cannot appeal
• Cannot withdraw
• Arbitrator's decision is conclusive

Litigation:

• Judgment is binding
• Parties cannot ignore
• But can appeal
• Eventually becomes final

Benefits of Binding Outcomes:

• Certainty and finality
• Forces definitive resolution
• Ends dispute completely

Risks of Binding Outcomes:

• Locked into potentially unfair outcome
• Limited appeal rights
• Cannot renegotiate

---

14. Enforceability of ADR Outcomes

Enforcement of Mediation Agreements

Court Enforcement:

• Settlement agreement is filed with court
• Court approves settlement
• Becomes court order
• Enforceable like court judgment
• Execution petition can compel compliance

Voluntary Compliance:

• Most parties comply voluntarily
• If non-compliance, execution petition filed
• Court enforces as judgment

Enforcement of Arbitral Awards

Domestic Awards (per Arbitration Act 2055, Section 31-32):

• Party has 45 days to voluntarily implement award after receipt
• If not implemented, other party files petition in District Court
• District Court must implement award within 30 days
• Award is enforced "as if" it were court judgment
• Enforcement officer compels compliance

Timeline for Enforcement:

• 45 days voluntary implementation period
• 30 days to file petition
• 30 days for court to enforce
• Total: ~105 days maximum

Foreign Awards:

• Applied to High Court within 90 days
• Must meet New York Convention requirements
• High Court reviews and forwards to District Court
• District Court enforces
• Nepal is signatory to New York Convention
• Foreign awards enforced if no public policy violation

Challenges to Enforcement

Grounds to Resist Enforcement:

• Party lacks capacity
• Arbitration agreement invalid
• Arbitrator lacked jurisdiction
• Improper notice given
• Award exceeds scope
• Award violates public policy
• Award obtained through fraud or corruption

Challenge Timeline:

• 35 days from award to challenge
• Must petition to set aside
• Court may set aside on limited grounds
• Challenge doesn't prevent enforcement unless court grants stay

---

15. Institutional Support for ADR in Nepal

Mediation Council

Established under Mediation Act 2068:

Functions:

• Registers and qualifies mediators
• Provides mediator training
• Sets mediation standards
• Monitors mediator quality
• Recommends mediation reforms

Mediator Registration:

• Mediators must complete training
• Must pass certification exam
• Registered in national mediator registry
• Continuing education required

Nepal Arbitration Council (NEPCA)

Autonomous organization for arbitration:

Functions:

• Appoints arbitrators
• Administers arbitration cases
• Maintains arbitrator registry
• Enforces awards
• Provides arbitration services

Arbitrator Panel:

• List of qualified arbitrators
• Diverse expertise areas
• International and domestic arbitrators
• Specialists in different industries

Court-Annexed Mediation Centers

District Court Centers:

• Established in district courts
• Provide mediation services
• Free or low-cost to litigants
• Trained court mediators
• Part of case management system

Court Procedures:

• Cases automatically referred to mediation
• 30-day mediation period mandated
• Mediation before trial
• Settlement becomes court order

NGO and Private ADR Providers

Nepal International Arbitration Center (NIAC):

• Private arbitration provider
• International and domestic cases
• Trained arbitrators
• Administrative support
• Training programs

Local Mediation Centers:

• NGO-sponsored mediation
• Community-level dispute resolution
• Training for community mediators
• Often free or low-cost
• Focus on accessible justice

---

16. When to Choose ADR vs. Litigation

Decision Framework

Choose Mediation When:

• Relationship preservation is important
• Quick resolution needed
• Cost is a concern
• Complex factual issues
• Creative solutions may work
• Parties willing to compromise
• Confidentiality is important

Choose Arbitration When:

• Binding decision needed
• Technical expertise required
• International considerations
• Confidentiality important
• Parties agreed to arbitrate
• Speed is important
• Complex commercial dispute

Choose Negotiation When:

• Simple disputes
• Parties already communicating
• Quick settlement possible
• Cost is major concern
• Relationship strong
• Parties trust each other

Choose Litigation When:

• Legal precedent needed
• Constitutional issues involved
• Parties completely opposed
• Binding enforcement crucial
• Public interest involved
• Vindication important
• Appeals likely

---

17. Strategic Considerations for Lawyers

When Advising Clients on ADR vs. Litigation

Client Factors to Consider:

• Client's primary goals (money, vindication, relationship, etc.)
• Client's financial situation (cost capacity)
• Client's timeline needs
• Client's risk tolerance
• Client's confidentiality needs
• Client's desire to preserve relationship

Case Factors to Consider:

• Strength of legal case
• Weakness of opponent's case
• Complexity of technical issues
• Amount in dispute
• Likelihood of settlement
• Judicial delay in that district
• Appeal likelihood

Strategic Recommendations:

1. Early case assessment
2. Realistic appraisal of case value
3. Cost-benefit analysis
4. Timeline analysis
5. Relationship impact analysis

Drafting ADR Clauses

Effective Arbitration Clause:

"Any dispute arising out of or relating to this agreement 
shall be finally resolved by arbitration conducted under the 
Arbitration Act 2055. The arbitration shall be conducted by 
a single arbitrator agreed upon by the parties, or if no 
agreement within 15 days, appointed by the Nepal 
Arbitration Council. The seat of arbitration shall be 
Kathmandu, Nepal. The language shall be Nepali/English. 
The arbitrator shall issue the award within 120 days of 
commencement. The award shall be final and binding. The 
cost of arbitration shall be shared equally unless the 
arbitrator awards costs differently."

Effective Mediation Clause:

"Before pursuing litigation, the parties agree to attempt 
resolution through mediation. The mediation shall be 
conducted by a mutually agreed mediator. The mediation 
shall follow the Mediation Act 2068 procedures. The 
mediation period shall be 30 days, extendable by agreement. 
If mediation fails, either party may pursue litigation. 
Mediation discussions shall be confidential and inadmissible 
in any subsequent proceeding."

---

18. Hybrid Approaches and Multi-Tiered Processes

Combination ADR Approaches

Negotiation Followed by Mediation:

1. Parties first attempt direct negotiation
2. If unsuccessful, proceed to mediation
3. If mediation unsuccessful, litigation

Mediation Before Arbitration:

1. Parties first attempt mediation
2. If unsuccessful, proceed to arbitration
3. Arbitration provides binding decision

Multi-Step Escalation:

1. Good faith negotiation (30 days)
2. Mediation attempt (30 days)
3. Arbitration (if necessary)
4. Litigation (only if arbitration invalid)

Benefits of Hybrid Approaches:

• Maximize settlement chances
• Preserve relationships as long as possible
• Escalate formality only as needed
• Often cheaper than jumping to litigation
• Provides structure and timeline

---

19. Challenges and Limitations of ADR

Mediation Limitations

Cannot Force Settlement:

• If party refuses, mediation fails
• Court cannot compel agreement
• Mediation is voluntary

Mediator Quality Varies:

• Training standards not uniform everywhere
• Some mediators better than others
• Poor mediator can cause failure

Power Imbalance Issues:

• Mediator cannot eliminate power imbalances
• Stronger party may dominate
• Weaker party may be coerced

Lack of Precedent:

• Mediation doesn't create legal precedent
• Individual settlements don't advance law
• Similar disputes arise repeatedly

Arbitration Limitations

Limited Appeal Rights:

• Cannot appeal arbitral award
• Cannot correct arbitrator's legal errors
• Must live with unfair award

Arbitrator Quality:

• Arbitrator may lack necessary expertise
• No quality control on decision-making
• Bad award cannot be overturned

Confidentiality as Limitation:

• While confidential, also means secret
• No public accountability
• No precedent for similar cases

Cost Concerns:

• Arbitrator fees can be expensive
• Multiple arbitrators increase costs
• Not cheaper than mediation

General ADR Limitations

Settlement Bias:

• ADR processes emphasize settlement
• May pressure parties to settle unfairly
• Strong case may be undervalued

Enforceability Issues:

• If ADR outcome requires enforcement
• Enforcement can be contested
• May end up in court anyway

Complexity Issues:

• Complex legal issues may require court
• Constitutional issues need courts
• Precedent needs court system

---

20. Future of ADR in Nepal

Current Trends

Increasing Mediation Use:

• Court-mandated mediation expanding
• Higher success rates as awareness grows
• More trained mediators available

Arbitration Growth:

• Increased international arbitration
• Nepal Arbitration Council expanding services
• NIAC handling more cases

Legislative Development:

• Mediation Act being implemented
• Arbitration Act being strengthened
• New ADR procedures being developed

Future Opportunities

Technology Integration:

• Online mediation platforms
• Virtual arbitration proceedings
• Digital case management
• E-filing for ADR cases

Accessibility Expansion:

• Mediation in remote areas
• Community-level dispute resolution
• Pro bono ADR services
• Legal aid for ADR participation

Quality Improvement:

• Better mediator and arbitrator training
• Standardized procedures
• Ethics enforcement
• Performance evaluation

Specialization:

• Commercial dispute specialists
• Family law mediators
• Labor dispute experts
• Industry-specific arbitrators

Conclusion

ADR represents Nepal's future for dispute resolution. As the court system becomes more efficient through continued development, ADR mechanisms will increasingly handle cases that benefit from faster, cheaper, more collaborative resolution. The choice between ADR and litigation will become increasingly sophisticated, with lawyers guiding clients toward optimal dispute resolution strategies based on specific case characteristics and client goals.

For lawyers in Nepal, mastery of ADR methods—particularly mediation and arbitration—is essential. These skills complement traditional litigation skills and provide clients with flexible, effective alternatives to court litigation. As Nepal develops economically and socially, ADR methods will become standard practice for forward-thinking lawyers and their clients.