Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Judicial dispute resolution in commonwealth jurisdictions - Comparing the evolving judicial role in Canada, Singapore and Australia||Authors:||ALEXANDRA OTIS||Keywords:||Judicial Mediation, Court, Legal System, Administration of Justice, ADR, Role of Judge||Issue Date:||22-May-2006||Citation:||ALEXANDRA OTIS (2006-05-22). Judicial dispute resolution in commonwealth jurisdictions - Comparing the evolving judicial role in Canada, Singapore and Australia. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.||Abstract:||In Canada, Singapore and Australia, an array of Judicial Dispute Resolution programmes have been implemented in the last 10 years, allowing judges in those jurisdictions to act as mediators. Because the role of judges has traditionally been seen as adjudicative the practice of judicial mediation raises concerns of compatibility between the old and new roles of judges.The argument presented in the thesis is that judicial dispute resolution (JDR) has changed the traditional adjudicative role of judges, broadening it to include a more facilitative role. Such change should be recognised and welcomed as a positive addition to the court system and the legal services offered to the public.||URI:||http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/15179|
|Appears in Collections:||Master's Theses (Open)|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
|Final Version LLM Thesis 16 May 2006.pdf||2.04 MB||Adobe PDF|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.