Arbitration is a less well known, judicial, and private way of resolving smaller and non-public disputes between two parties. Arbitration is a less formal way of solving disputes, but its counterpart, mediation, is more formal. The best way to title it would be a ‘Private Court.’

In 1889, the United Kingdom passed the Arbitration Act, which allowed for arbitration to be used, in the future, more were passed making it international, and easier to handle. The usefulness and significance of arbitration are demonstrated by its increasing use by the business community and the legal profession in many countries of the world (Domke). Another good thing about it is that the chosen arbitrator is totally unbiased, neutral, and impartial, which means that the dispute would not be solved in a biased, and unfair way.

The process is simple, two parties choose the location of the arbitration, while the arbitrator is chosen to be neutral and independant. Arbitrators are paid to rule out this process, and chosen by the parties. The same arbitrator cannot be chosen twice because there is beforehand knowledge of one of the parties involved.  The process can be chosen to be confidential, meaning that it can be kept private and inaccessible to the public or courts. The arbitrator favors a side based on both of the stories of the process, and gives a reward. If a side doesn't agree with this reward, then one of two things will happen: they are given a ten day notice to go to court and solve it that way, or if they don’t accept that, they are forced to comply by the decision of the arbitrator.

The parties are always given a choice, either go to court, or settle in a smaller manner. Usually people who choose arbitration don’t want to make the dispute public, or just want a faster and more upright solution. This would also save you time, a lot of time, because courts require a lot of time, time which would be saved if you settled for a smaller, more private judge, who isn’t biased towards one party.

There is room for cons of arbitration like rising costs and the struggle to find a suitable arbitrator who was background checked and proven to be neutral and have no ties to the parties whatsoever. The fact that arbitration hearings are generally held in private rather than in an open courtroom, and decisions are usually not publicly accessible, is considered a benefit by some people in some situations. Others, however, lament that this lack of transparency makes the process more likely to be tainted or biased, which is especially troublesome because arbitration decisions are so infrequently reviewed by the courts (Repa). The arbitrator's award is usually rejected and then people wind up in courts anyway because they don’t like the decision, or they think that a second opinion is necessary, making the whole concept of arbitration the one thing it wasn’t supposed to be, a waste of time, money, and ultimately useless.