answersLogoWhite

0

No. A court must have jurisdiction (the legal right to hear a case) over the parties, subject matter, and territory in order to render a binding decision. In fact, the court must have appropriate jurisdiction just to hear the case.

User Avatar

Wiki User

15y ago

What else can I help you with?

Related Questions

What is the difference between an arbitrator and a mediator in the context of conflict resolution?

An arbitrator makes a decision for the parties involved in a dispute, which is usually binding. A mediator helps the parties communicate and reach a mutually agreed upon solution, but does not make a decision for them.


What are two alternatives for resolving disputes?

Two alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods are arbitration and mediation. Arbitration is where the dispute is given to a third party who makes a ruling on which party is correct. Arbitration may be binding or non binding depending on the agreement of the parties. The other method is mediation where the parties explain their dispute to a third party who works with both sides together to find a settlement to which both parties agree. The mediator makes no decision that binds the parties.


What are the two types of jurisdiction that a court must have to hear a case and render a binding decision over the parties?

hat ar two type of juissdicton


Do arbitrators render legally binding decisions?

yes, If the parties involved agree that the decision made will be legally binding


When parties are not compelled to comply with the arbitrators decision it is a?

non binding arbitration


What is setteling a dispute by agreeing to accept the decision of a neutral outsider called?

Settling a dispute by agreeing to accept the decision of a neutral outsider is called arbitration. In this process, both parties present their case to the arbitrator, who then makes a binding decision to resolve the conflict. Arbitration is often used as an alternative to litigation, as it can be more efficient and less formal.


What is the source of an arbitrator's authority to arbitrate?

The source of an arbitrator's authority comes from the parties to the dispute being arbitrated. Both parties agree that their dispute will be settled through arbitration rather than through litigation and they enter into a contract promising that the arbitration will be binding they will abide by the decision of the arbitrator. If one party refuses to honor the arbitrator's decision, the other party can go to court and have the court enforce the arbitration decision, but it won't have to litigate the actual dispute all over again.


What is a way of settling a dispute in which both parties agree to abide by the decision of a third party called?

The term for such an agreement, where both parties agree to abide by a mediator's decision is often called arbitration. Or, in some circumstances, binding arbitration. This often seen in Union and management disagreements.


When parties are not compelled to comply with arbitrators decision it is a?

non binding arbitration


When parties compel not to comply with the arbitrator decision it is a?

Non-binding arbitration


What does an arbitrator do in the process of resolving disputes?

An arbitrator is a neutral third party who listens to both sides of a dispute and makes a decision to resolve the conflict outside of court. They consider evidence and arguments from both parties before reaching a final and binding decision.


If there is a dispute over ownership of property would a state have diversity jurisdiction in personam jurisdiction in rem jurisdiction or no jurisdiction at all?

Diversity jurisdiction is a basis for federal courts to exercise jurisdiction if the parties to a civil cause of action are residents of different states and the amount in controversy is large enough to make use of federal resources practical. A state may legitimately exercise jurisdiction either if it has in rem jurisdiction over the property or in personam jurisdiction over all parties to the dispute.