Abstract:
The study sought to accomplish three main tasks. These were to clarify ‘appropriate dispute resolution method’, design a mechanism for selecting an appropriate dispute resolution method for use in resolving disputes and finally, settle the age-old debate as to which dispute resolution method is the most appropriate one in Ghana. While quantitative methods were employed in the pursuit of the first two tasks, mixed methods research, that is, sequential explanatory design was used for the third task.
The findings are that, the appropriate dispute resolution method is that which delivers a just, fair, and enforceable outcome. Also, disputants should select dispute resolution methods that ensure reconciliation, fairness, relationship preservation, attainment of expected outcome(s) and decision enforceability. Lastly, this study found that there is no absolutely appropriate dispute resolution method in Ghana. The findings revealed that it is the type and stage of dispute, issues in dispute, disputant’s circumstances, the legal framework, and the dispute resolution practitioner that collectively determine the most appropriate dispute resolution method at any point in time.
It is therefore suggested that policy makers in Ghana should consider amending Sections 1 and 113(c) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 798 of 2010 to allow for use of the other methods to resolve disputes relating to matters of the environment and those of public interest and make negotiation agreements binding. Furthermore, it is suggested that a central authority should be set up to certify, train and regulate other dispute resolution practice in Ghana.
Finally, it is proposed that disputants should consider the type of dispute and stage of the dispute, the dispute resolution practitioner (if it is ascertainable), disputant’s circumstances, issues in dispute, and the dispute resolution legal framework for selecting the most appropriate dispute resolution method to settle their disputes.
