In the legal field, disputes between companies, individuals or service providers are inevitable. However, going to court is not always the best option. Court proceedings are often lengthy, costly and draining, both emotionally and financially. In response to these challenges, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has gained prominence in recent years, allowing disputes to be resolved more quickly and efficiently.
From 2025, with the entry into force of Organic Law 1/2025, the need to explore alternative ways before going to court will be even more relevant. This legislation introduces the obligation to attempt prior negotiation before filing a lawsuit in the civil sphere, consolidating the use of mediation, conciliation and arbitration as preferential mechanisms for conflict resolution.
In this article, we will explore how these tools work, when it is convenient to use them and what advantages they offer over a traditional judicial process.
Going to court involves a significant investment of time and money. A civil proceeding can drag on for months or even years, generating a considerable financial burden in terms of attorneys' fees, court fees and other associated expenses. In addition, the outcome of a lawsuit is uncertain, which adds an element of risk for both parties.
On the other hand, courts are often overcrowded, which contributes to the slowness of the judicial system. Backlogs and lack of resources in many jurisdictions have made litigation an inefficient option for resolving disputes in a reasonable amount of time.
Against this backdrop, extrajudicial methods have emerged as a viable alternative for those parties seeking a quick, inexpensive and less confrontational solution.
There are several strategies for resolving disputes without the need to go before a judge. Each has its particularities and is best suited to different types of disputes.
Negotiation is the simplest and most direct method of reaching an agreement. It is based on communication between the parties with the objective of finding a mutually beneficial solution.
This approach is especially useful in cases where the parties have a business or personal relationship that they wish to preserve. It allows flexible and customized agreements to be reached without recourse to a third party. However, negotiation can sometimes be hindered by significant differences in the parties' positions, lack of trust or the absence of clear incentives to reach consensus.
When direct negotiation does not work, mediation is an effective alternative. In this process, an impartial mediator helps the parties communicate and explore solutions that meet their interests.
Unlike arbitration or trial, mediation does not impose a decision on the parties. Its goal is to guide them toward a voluntary agreement that reflects their needs and concerns. This method is particularly useful in commercial disputes, labor disputes and family matters, where the relationship between the parties is a key factor.
Mediation has a high success rate and is often quicker and less costly than a judicial process. It also offers a confidential space where parties can address their differences without the pressure of public litigation.
Learn more about the types and processes of mediation
Arbitration is an option for those cases where a final resolution is required without recourse to the courts. Unlike mediation, where the parties reach an agreement voluntarily, in arbitration an impartial third party - the arbitrator - issues a binding decision after evaluating the evidence and arguments of both parties.
Arbitration is especially useful in commercial and contractual disputes, where the parties want a quick solution with legal effect. Its main advantage is flexibility: the parties can choose the arbitrator, define the rules of procedure and set shorter deadlines than those of an ordinary court.
In addition, arbitration is a confidential process, which makes it an attractive option for companies seeking to avoid media exposure of their disputes.
The entry into force of Organic Law 1/2025 marks a significant change in the way disputes are dealt with in the civil sphere. As of April 2025, it will be mandatory to demonstrate that a negotiated solution has been attempted before going to court.
This regulation seeks to encourage the use of ADR to decongest the courts and reduce the time it takes to resolve disputes. In practice, this means that those who initiate civil proceedings without having explored an alternative route could face procedural obstacles or even the inadmissibility of their claim.
To comply with this new regulation, it is essential that companies and individuals know their options and are prepared to use negotiation, mediation or arbitration tools effectively.
The choice between negotiation, mediation or arbitration depends on the nature of the dispute, the relationship between the parties and the urgency of the resolution.
In a context where litigation is becoming less and less viable as a first option, taking advantage of these alternatives can make the difference between a long and costly process or a quick and effective solution.
Resolving a legal dispute without going to court is not only possible, but advisable in most cases. Negotiation, mediation and arbitration offer more agile, economical and adapted to the needs of the parties.
With the entry into force of Law 1/2025, these options will not only be convenient, but also mandatory in many civil proceedings. Preparing for this change and knowing the tools available will allow companies and individuals to manage their disputes more efficiently, reducing costs and resolution times.
In a legal system that is increasingly oriented towards efficiency and the de-judicialization of conflicts, opting for alternative methods is not only a smart choice, but a necessity for those seeking to resolve disputes effectively.