Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal (ADRJ)
Evaluating dispute resolution theory and practice in Australia and overseas
About the Journal
The Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal (ISSN: 1441-7847) is a key resource for staying up to date in the area of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). The journal features articles covering the broad spectrum of ADR methods, including mediation, arbitration, independent expert appraisal, negotiation and early neutral evaluation.
This is the only Australasian journal covering the theory, analysis and practice of dispute resolution in Australia and overseas.
Covering a diversity of topical matters relating to ADR within and outside the court system, the Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal includes articles from a broad range of ADR practitioners, teachers and academics.
Case notes provide applied illustrations of how dispute resolution processes work in practice, making the Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal a practical and essential resource.
Ruth Charlton is a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales and an experienced lawyer mediator. Her publications include The Dispute Resolution Guidebook (LBC Information Services, 2000) and The Mediator’s Handbook (Thomson Reuters, 3rd ed, 2014), with Micheline Dewdney and Geoff Charlton.
Chief Editorial Consultant
Sir Laurence Street, AC, KCMG, formerly Chief Justice of New South Wales
Dr Tom Altobelli, Judge, Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Ms Linda Fisher, Linda Fisher & Associates Pty Limited, Dispute Resolution and Training Specialists, Sydney, NSW
Ms Maureen Garwood, Approved Family and Child Mediator under the Family Law Act 1975, Mediator and Negotiator – Just Resolutions, Melbourne
Mr Paul Lewis, Lawyer and Mediator, Sexton Family Law, Solicitors, Kirribilli, NSW
Ms Babette Smith, Mediator and ADR Consultant, Author, Journalist
Professor David Spencer, Deputy Provost, Australian Catholic University
Dr Gregory Tillett, Senior Research Fellow in Conflict Resolution, University of Western Sydney, Nepean
Subscribe or Purchase
To subscribe to this Journal or purchase individual articles, please visit our “Subscribe or Purchase” page.
For the individual contents pages for each Part, click here.
The May 2011 Issue of the Australian Dispute Resolution Journal includes articles on a diverse range of topics, including judicial mediation, corporation disputes, internal workplace mediation, FDR practitioners, access to justice, Chinese mediation and civil justice reform.
by Kathy Douglas* This article reports on research that gathered data relating to the teaching of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in law schools in two States of Australia: Victoria and Queensland. Through semi-structured interviews and questionnaires, a number of themes were identified including the importance of preparing future lawyers for non-adversarial practice through ADR. The ...more
Over 2009 and 2010, the Australian Research Council undertook to rank journals in the Arts & Humanities Sector as part of the “Excellence in Research for Australia” initiative. Law journals were included in the ranking. Now the rankings that were assigned are being reviewed and new rankings will be released in 2012. Thomson Reuters has observed there may be some unintended long-term consequences of the ERA methodology and outcomes. To communicate these concerns, we have released a position statement.
By the Hon Marilyn Warren AC. This article was originally presented by Chief Justice Warren at the Supreme and Federal Court Judges’ Conference in 2010. In it, her Honour advocates the pursuit of direct judicial involvement in alternative dispute resolution, but rejects the proposal that judges should act as mediators.
By David Spencer. Each issue of ADRJ commences with a look at the most recent cases decided in dispute resolution and the important issues dealth; as well as any ADR topics which have appeared in the news.
By Kathy Douglas, Nadia Sager and Rachael Field. Conferencing is a restorative justice process that is used in the criminal justice system in Australia to deal with a variety of offences. In this article, the authors analyse research into the understandings of conferencing practitioners regarding the issue of the neutrality of the third party in facilitating the process.