Which statement best reflects the relationship between ADR and litigation?

Which statement best reflects the relationship between ADR and litigation?

• A. Litigation should be avoided if possible by using ADR
• B. Litigation should always occur first
• C. ADR is never binding
• D. ADR only applies to civil cases

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that ADR provides a way to resolve disputes without going to court, saving time, cost, and risk—often giving the parties more control over the outcome. Because of this, the best statement is that litigation should be avoided if possible by using ADR. It captures the practical aim of ADR as a preferred path to settlement rather than an automatic step into litigation. It's worth noting that some ADR processes can be binding (for example, arbitration creates a binding decision), while others are non-binding unless the parties reach an agreement (like mediation). This shows why saying ADR is never binding is incorrect. And ADR is not limited only to civil cases; it spans various dispute types beyond strictly civil litigation.

The main idea is that ADR provides a way to resolve disputes without going to court, saving time, cost, and risk—often giving the parties more control over the outcome. Because of this, the best statement is that litigation should be avoided if possible by using ADR. It captures the practical aim of ADR as a preferred path to settlement rather than an automatic step into litigation.

It's worth noting that some ADR processes can be binding (for example, arbitration creates a binding decision), while others are non-binding unless the parties reach an agreement (like mediation). This shows why saying ADR is never binding is incorrect. And ADR is not limited only to civil cases; it spans various dispute types beyond strictly civil litigation.