ARBITRATION FOR PERSONAL HARM CLAIMS

Abstract

According to Judge Henry L. Ughetta, “it is time to change the way we think and behave and start establishing a tradition of prompt justice in this crucial area of law (damage).”
Arbitration has become an increasingly important mechanism within the system of (ADR), particularly in purpose of damage and tort disputes. This paper examines the growing use of arbitration in claims involving motor-vehicle accidents, medical negligence, product liability, and workplace injuries. It compares arbitration with original legal proceeding in terms of procedure, value, accessibility, and timeliness, highlighting how arbitration provides a faster, more flexible, and private means of resolving disputes while reducing the burden on overworked courts.
At the same time, the paper explores critical challenges associated with arbitration, such as limited discovery rights, lack of transparency, restricted opportunities for appeal, and potential arbitrator bias, especially in cases involving pre-dispute mandatory arbitration clauses. Drawing on empirical studies and legal frameworks from India, the United States, and the United Kingdom, the research evaluates the fairness and efficiency of arbitral proceedings in personal harm cases.
The study concludes that while arbitration cannot fully replace judicial processes, it offers a vital complement that promotes timely, cost-effective, and specialized justice. Policy recommendations are proposed to strengthen enforcement, transparency, and accessibility, ensuring that arbitration serves both efficiency and fairness in harm dispute resolution.