Study One: Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunals (SENDIST) provide independent adjudication of parental appeals against Local Authority (LA) decisions. The Parent Partnership Service (PPS) and Disagreement Resolution Services (DRS) are both arranged to reduce disagreements and, specifically, to prevent tribunals. Study One aimed to explore parental experiences of Local Disagreement Resolution Services (LDRSs) including the PPS and DRS. A secondary aim of Study One was to identify barriers to and facilitators of disagreement resolution from a parental perspective. Methods: Study One utilised semi-structured interviews as a means of exploring seven parents' experiences and constructs. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis in order to specify key themes relating to the resolution of disagreements about SEN. Results: Parents reported a sense of embattlement with the Local Authority that appeared to act as a barrier to the resolution of disagreements. Parents also identified a number of facilitators of disagreement resolution including: Feeling 'listened to'; Having access to a 'legitimate decision-maker'; and becoming better informed. A number of barriers to disagreement resolution were also reported, including but not limited to: a perception that no one is listening to them; a perception that LA staff lack independence; a perception that the LA cannot be trusted to deliver SEN provision. Study Two:Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunals (SENDIST) provide independent adjudication of parental appeals against Local Authority (LA) decisions. The Parent Partnership Service (PPS) and Disagreement Resolution Services (DRS) are both arranged to reduce disagreements and, specifically, to prevent tribunals. Study Two aimed to explore experiences of professionals working within Local Disagreement Resolution Services (LDRSs) including the PPS and DRS. A secondary aim of Study Two was to identify barriers to and facilitators of disagreement resolution from a professional perspective. A final aim of Study Two was to synthesise the perceptions reported by professionals in Study Two with those reported by parents in Study One. Methods: Study Two utilised semi-structured interviews as a means of exploring six LA-employed professionals' experiences and constructs. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis in order to specify key themes relating to the resolution of disagreements about SEN. Findings emerging from Study Two were integrated with findings from Study One using the themes generated through thematic analysis. Results: Professionals reported a number of parental factors that were perceived to act as a barrier to disagreement resolution. These included but were not limited to: weak understanding of SEN systems and a lack of confidence to engage in mediation processes. Professionals did not identify any parental factors perceived to be conducive to disagreement resolution. A smaller number of facilitators of disagreement resolution were reported, including: early intervention; and face-to-face meetings. Synthesis of findings from Studies One and Two resulted in the creation of clusters of themes that can inform future policy and practice. Findings from Studies One and Two indicate that disagreement resolution is best supported where Local Authorities can promote: collaboration, information-sharing, and reassurance for parents.

本研究以在紐約證券交易所掛牌上市的美國存託憑證(American Depository Receipts；ADR)為研究樣本，運用隨機折現因子(Stochastic Discount Factor；SDF)，檢測台灣、香港、大陸股市與美國股市間的整合程度與發展趨勢。實證研究顯示，在研究樣本期間內，香港股市與美國股市的整合程度最佳，整合程度僅受總體股市股重挫的影響，且整合程度穩定性較高；台灣股市與美國股市整合程度，則隨時間進展，有逐漸改善整合趨勢；相較與台灣香港，大陸股市與美國股市整合程度最差，顯示兩市場間尚未整合。 / This paper discusses the application of the stochastic discount factor model to analyze the financial market integration between Taiwan, Hong Kong, China and U.S. stock markets, and to find out their integration trends in the long term. It also discusses the stability of financial market integration by σ- convergence and factors that cause the difference in stochastic discount factors. The empirical results show that the financial market integration between Hong Kong and U.S. stock market is the best among the three, and the degree of integration is influenced mainly by macroeconomic shocks. On the other hand, the degree of integration between Taiwan and U.S. stock market deteriorate temporarily due to FX rate changes and the issue of new ADR, but it is getting better as time goes by. The integration between China and U.S. stock market is the worst among three, these two markets are basically not integrated yet.

Šiame darbe nagrinėjamas civilinio proceso ir taikinamojo tarpininkavimo procedūros civiliniuose ginčuose santykis Lietuvoje. Pagrindinis dėmesys sutelkiamas į civilinio proceso ir taikinamojo tarpininkavimo tarpusavio santykio modelius tokius kaip: teisminio taikinamojo tarpininkavimo modelis, neteisminio taikinamojo tarpininkavimo modelis, nukreipiamojo taikinamojo tarpininkavimo modelis. Taip pat darbe lyginami civilinio proceso bei taikinamojo tarpininkavimo procedūros civiliniuose ginčuose pagrindiniai principai, ieškoma jų panašumų skirtumų, tiriama kaip principai lemia nagrinėjamų ginčų sprendimo procesų veikimą. Darbe taip pat siekiama nustatyti ar tam tikros ginčo savybės turi įtakos tam, kuris ginčo sprendimo būdas gali būti labiau tinkamas jo išsprendimui. / This thesis is analyzing relation between civil process and mediation in Lithuania. The main focus is on models of relation between civil process and mediation such as: in court mediation, out of court mediation, diverted mediation. The thesis also puts main principles of civil process and mediation in comparison, analyses similarities, differences and how the principles influence the way process works. Also this thesis researches if some particular forms of conflicts can be more suitable to specific dispute resolution methods.

La crise de la justice existe depuis plusieurs décennies en France, en Angleterre et au Pays de Galles, et touchent de plus en plus d’autres États comme la Chine. Les mêmes causes, la libéralisation économique, politique et sociale produisent les mêmes effets : l’augmentation du contentieux, du coût du procès et de la longueur des procédures, même si le degré de la maladie est différent d’un système juridique à un autre. Régler les différends autrement est alors devenu une nécessité. Une nécessité, en terme d’accès à la justice et de garantie des droits, mais également en terme de coût non seulement pour le justiciable, mais aussi pour l’État, qui a conduit à faire évoluer le système judiciaire en favorisant l’émergence voire la réémergence d’un nouveau mode de régulation sociale : l’alternative dispute resolution (ADR) ou les modes amiables de résolution des différends (MARD) qui sont tous deux des modes informels, non judiciaires de résolution des différends. Néanmoins, les MARD sont loin d’être une copie conforme de l’ADR notamment en raison des différences culturelles juridiques et judiciaires qui existent au sein de chaque système juridique, et dans laquelle cette voie alternative évolue. Malgré des spécificités fondamentales, il existe de nombreuses convergences dans la mise en œuvre et les modalités de fonctionnement des processus amiables en France, en Angleterre, au Pays de Galles, et en Chine. Avec les modes amiables de résolution des différends ou l’alternative dispute resolution, la conception de la justice est différente de celle dictée par la justice traditionnelle. La solution n’est plus dictée par un tiers extérieur, mais par les justiciables eux-mêmes, seuls, ou avec l’aide d’un tiers qu’ils auront personnellement choisi. Cette liberté donnée aux parties constitue une caractéristique intrinsèque des modes amiables. Loin d’être isolé, ils viennent enrichir la réponse judiciaire aux différends. Ils peuvent être utilisés seuls ou en articulation avec l’institution judiciaire. / The crisis of justice existed for decades in France, England and Wales, affecting more and more countries like China. The same causes, economic, political and social liberalization, produce the same effects: increased litigation, the cost of the trial and the strength of the proceedings, even if the degree of the disease is different from a legal system to another. Resolve disputes otherwise then became a necessity. A necessity in terms of access to justice and guarantee of rights, but also in terms of cost not only for court users but for the state, which has led to change the legal system by promoting the emergence or the re-emergence of a new mode of social regulation: alternative dispute resolution (ADR) or alternative methods for resolving disputes (MARD), which are both informal methods, non-judicial dispute resolution. However, the MARD is far from being a copy of the ADR particularly because of legal and judicial cultural differences that exist in each legal system, in which the alternative phenomenon evolves. Despite these fundamental differences, there are many similarities in the implementation and operating procedures of the amicable process in France, England, Wales, and China. With ADR or MARD, the concept of justice is different from litigation. The solution is not dictated by an external third party, but by the parties, alone or with the help of a third party that they have personally selected. The freedom given to the parties is a specificity of the amicable modes. Far from being isolated, they enrich the judicial response to the dispute. They can be used alone or in coordination with the judiciary.

In the first chapter, we analyze the role of market development, risk premium, and transparency as factors influencing the value of cash in firms listed as American Depository Receipts. Based on the method by Pinkowitz and Williamson (2002), our primary results are as follows. The market value of cash is greater on average for ADR firms than for U.S. firms, and within the ADR sample the value of cash is greater for firms based in less developed countries after 2007 financial crisis but not before. Together, the results suggest that the market development is especially important during more volatile periods. Further, the value of cash is negatively associated with the market risk premium. In addition, the relation between insider trading law execution and the value of cash is statistically insignificant for all periods, but corporate-level transparency as measured by the number of analysts is weakly negatively related to ADR firms’ cash value before 2007 after controlling for the fixed effects. The second chapter attempts to assess the relative importance of superior information and hedging in institutional trading in equity index futures in the Taiwan Futures market for the sample period of January to June 2012. Based on the methodology by Llorente, Michaely, Saar, and Wang (2002), we find that, for the market as a whole, significant informed trading or hedging frequently occur, and the opening minutes tend to be associated with a greater portion of trading motivated by hedging. More important to our purpose, for foreign institutions the absolute value of institutional order imbalance tends to be greater on days when the overall market’s informed trading is greater in the cases of regular contract on Taiwan composite index futures and electronic index futures, but for the dealer and domestic fund groups trading is not correlated with the overall market’s informed trading or hedging. An additional analysis of the relation between past institution trades and current returns provides some evidence implying institutions are informed, but the evidence can also be interpreted as their trades, which account for more than half of the overall trading, having an impact on subsequent trades.

Chapter 1 of this study investigates the link between a firm’s capital structure and their industry competitive behavior. Given the competitive behavior in certain markets, Cournot or Bertrand, we investigate if there are any inborn characteristics of these markets’ competitive behavior that would create an incentive for Cournot firms to have a different strategic debt level than Bertrand firms. Related theories argue that any industry’s competitive behavior, whether it is Bertrand or Cournot would typically consist of a certain type of debt and pursue a certain type of competitive strategy, based on its classification. In this study, we investigate the debt level of a sample of firms classified into either Cournot or Bertrand competition, i.e. explore competitive behavior as a characteristic of firms that tend to be associated with different debt ratios and determine if the competitive market type does in fact lead to a varying debt ratio target. We used two different measures to categorize competition type, the CSM and the SI measure. Our findings indicate that there is no significant difference between differentiated debt levels between Bertrand and Cournot firms. Chapter 2 of the study examines various factors that may affect American Depository Receipts’ trading volume distribution between their home and US markets. These include factors not previously considered in the extant literature. One such factor is the trading motive (hedging or speculative) of investors. Other factors examined include price impact, relative volatility, market to book ratio, as well as a cultural dimension factor: individualism. Controlling for time-specific effects, we find that the relative motive measure of cross-listed firms has a positive relationship on the trading volume distribution. In addition, when looking at a small sample of firms with different motive factors, we find that hedging motive in the home country leads to an increased proportion of trading in the host country relative to the home country, while speculative motive leads to a decrease in the volume share of the host country relative to the home country. A positive and significant relationship is also observed between volatility and the log of trading volume share. The relationship is negative for liquidity and visibility in relation to the trading volume distribution of cross-listed firm’s stocks. Culture difference at home relative to host is found to positively impact trading volume distribution of cross-listed stocks.

Este estudo examina as estipulações voltadas à instituição de meios multiportas de solução de controvérsias, mecanismo responsável por materializar a vontade da partes em solucionar os seus conflitos via métodos alternativos ou adequados de solução de controvérsias, tendo relevante papel na materialização do escopo social do processo. Há uma clara dicotomia entre os denominados métodos de solução de controvérsias consensuais, nos quais a própria participação das partes levará à solução e à conformação do litígio e, de outro lado, os métodos adjudicatórios de solução de controvérsias, no qual haverá um terceiro imparcial escolhido pelas partes ou de acordo com mecanismos por elas estabelecido e que será responsável pela solução da controvérsia. Existem ainda métodos combinados ou mistos, em que são aglutinados elementos dos métodos denominados primários, quais sejam negociação, conciliação, mediação e arbitragem. Clara a diferença entre essas categorias de métodos de solução de controvérsias, deve-se analisar, ainda, se há alguma diferença no tocante à vinculação das partes a cada uma das mencionadas categorias de solução de controvérsias e, com grande importância, de que modo métodos consensuais podem interferir no surgimento e desenvolvimento de métodos adjudicatórios. Em relação à vinculação dos métodos de solução de controvérsias adjudicatórios, a grande referência no direito brasileiro é a arbitragem, que conta com legislação própria e deve muito de seu sucesso no atual estado dos métodos de solução de controvérsias no direito brasileiro a alterações relativas à sua vinculação e efetivação. Nitidamente, há uma inserção das cláusulas de solução de controvérsias, seja qual for o método utilizado no âmbito da ciência processual. A base de tais cláusulas é de direito privado, fundamentando-se em institutos bastante conhecidos: transação e compromisso que ganharam a categorização jurídica de contrato após o Código Civil de 2002. Do ponto de vista da adoção desses instrumentos jurídicos como veículos da utilização dos métodos de solução de controvérsias, são previstas técnicas diversas de uso. A primeira é extrajudicial, baseada na planificação de solução de conflitos, que pode ser feita pelas partes e seus advogados, e uma segunda, que é extrajudicial baseada no caseflow e no case management, nos quais o Judiciário assume o papel de coordenador e aplicador de tais métodos. A relação entre os métodos de solução de controvérsias ganha caráter dinâmico na medida em que determinados sistemas de solução de controvérsias são combinados para uma dada questão. Trata-se das chamadas cláusulas escalonadas que têm por escopo acompanhar a escalada de litigiosidade que possa surgir em determinada discussão jurídica, combinando métodos consensuais e adjudicatórios de solução de litígios. Em qualquer situação, de acordo com os termos dos arts. 158 e 466-B do Código de Processo Civil que podem analogamente ser comparados com os arts. 4.º e 7.º da Lei de Arbitragem, há a total vinculação das partes ao método de solução de controvérsias escolhido. Questão bastante tormentosa é a inserção e a inter-relação dos métodos de solução de controvérsias, especialmente com o processo civil e os efeitos que daí podem decorrer. Nesse aspecto, sendo um método consensual, as partes que a ele aderiram terá que realizá-lo antes da busca de um método adjudicatório de adesão voluntária, como é a arbitragem, ou um método adjudicatório inevitável, como é o Judiciário. Trata-se do efeito negativo das cláusulas ADR. Contudo, há que verificar que efeitos seriam gerados aos métodos adjudicatórios pela não realização de um método consensual precedente. Os métodos de solução de controvérsias poderiam ser encarados como pressupostos processuais, condições da ação ou questões prévias, promovendo diferentes resultados em um processo judicial ou arbitral. Há que se buscar a solução que melhor se adequar a um contexto de solução de controvérsias. Desta feita, os MASCs devem ser colocados como hipóteses suspensão dos processos arbitral ou judicial, suspensão essa que deve durar até a realização do referido método acordado anteriormente, garantindo-se a sua eficácia. No tocante a este ponto, o Estado tem um relevante papel político e legislativo de modo a incentivar a utilização de tais métodos e garantir-lhes a eficácia. Além disso, a parte que se furtar está sujeita a consequências contratuais que podem ser previstas, tais como a imposição de multas e cláusulas penais. Vislumbram-se também hipóteses de perda de uma chance, com o agravamento do litígio e prejuízos que podem advir do tolhimento da chance de um método de solução de controvérsias produzir um resultado. De qualquer modo, aquele que pretendia utilizar o método, para se valer dessas possíveis indenizações, tem o dever de mitigar o próprio dano como resultado da mesma cláusula geral de boa-fé que, ao reverso, obrigou o ex-adverso a utilizar o método e foi violada. Pode-se pensar nesse contexto, ainda, a possibilidade de métodos alternativos de solução de controvérsias serem estabelecidos por meio de cláusulas que prevejam a venda de excussão entre as partes ou mesmo medidas corporativas, tais como ocorrem na BM&F Bovespa, apenas de acordo com a manifestação de vontade das partes de adesão ao referido sistema, sendo uma prova da força e extensão do vínculo surgido de uma estipulação de solução de controvérsias, ainda que consensual. Há, de qualquer modo, uma execução por transformação em que a manifestação de vontade apresentada pelas partes pode ser efetivada pelo magistrado permitindo a utilização dos métodos de solução de controvérsias a partir do momento em que ocorreu a adesão das partes. Por fim, a confidencialidade que pode ser aplicada aos métodos de solução de controvérsias tem natureza contratual, não interferindo na eficácia das cláusulas ADR. / This study examines the stipulations aimed to establishing alternative settled mechanism responsible for materializing the will of the parties to resolve their disputes through alternative or appropriate dispute settlement with a relevant role in the materialization of the social scope of the process. There is a clear dichotomy between the called consensual methods of dispute resolution in which the participation of the parties will lead to the solution and the conformation of the dispute and, on the other hand, the called adjudicatory methods in which an impartial third party will be chosen by parties or in accordance with mechanisms established by them and will be responsible for resolving the dispute. There are also mixed or combined methods, which contains elements of the primary methods, namely, negotiation, conciliation, mediation and arbitration. Differences between these categories of methods of dispute settlement shall be analyzed, even if there is any difference with respect the binding feature of those methods and, with great importance, so that consensual methods can interfere in the emergence and development of adjudicatory methods. In relation to binding adjudicatory methods of dispute settlement, the most important reference in Brazil is Arbitration. Its Law is responsible for it succed as a method of dispute resolution in the Brazil, specially for ten. changes to their binding feature and enforcement of its result, now recognized as a sentence. The legal basis of such clauses is private law and are based on well-known institutions: transaction and commitment that are a contractual legal categorie after the Civil Code. From the standpoint of using, these legal instruments are vehicles and are expected to use different techniques. The first rendition is based on planning for conflict resolution that can be made by the parties and their lawyers and a second which is based on caseflow and case management, in which the judiciary takes over the role to coordinate and implement these methods. The relationship between the methods of dispute settlement became dynamic when individual methods of dispute settlement are combined to a given question. These are the called staggered terms which seeks to track the escalation of litigation that may arise in a particular legal issue, combining both consensual and adjudicatory dispute resolution methods. In any event, in accordance with the terms of the arts. 158 and 466-B of the Civil Procedure Code that can similarly be compared with the arts. 4o and 7o of the Arbitration Act, there is the share of binding feature of the method of dispute resolution chosen. Question very stormy is the interrelationship of the insertion of dispute resolution methods, especially consensual and adjudicatory methodse. In this aspect, a method is agreed, the parties have to do it before the search for an adjudicatory method. This is the negative effect of ADR clauses. However, there it is found that the effects would be generated by methods Adjudicative not performing a method consesual precedent. The methods of dispute settlement may be seen as procedural requisites, conditions of action or issues prior action by promoting different results in a lawsuit or arbitration. We must seek the solution that best fits the context of a multi door dispute settlement. The conclusion is that the ADR methods should be placed as hypotheses of suspension for arbitration or judicial processes. That suspension should last until the completion of this method previously agreed, assuring its effectiveness. Concerning this point, the State has an important political and legislative role in order to encourage the use of such methods and guarantee their effectiveness. In addition, the part that is subject to evade contractual consequences that can be provided such as the imposition of fines and penalty clauses. In case of ADR clauses breach the lost of a chance theory shall applyo, with increased litigation and damages that may arise from the chance of stunting a method of dispute resolution to produce a result. Anyway, who intended to use the breach of the other party to take advantage of possible damages, has the duty to mitigate the loss itself as a result of the same general clause on good faith that, in reverse, enforces the former adverse to using the method and was violated. One might think in this context also the possibility of alternative methods of dispute settlement be established by means of clauses providing for the sale of excussion between the parties or even intracorporis issues such as occur in the BM&F Bovespa, only in accordance with the manifestation the will of the parties to accede to such a system, a testament to the strength and extent of the relationship arising from a stipulation of settlement of disputes, even if consensual. The intetion to use an alternative dispute resolution shall be given by the partíreis but in case of breach of this obligation the interested party can obtain an mandatory decision by the Judge indicating that the other party must attend the dispute resolution method. Finally, the confidentiality that can be applied to methods of dispute settlement is contractual in nature, not interfering with the enforcement of ADR clauses.

In the past, governments were directly responsible for carrying out projects concerning the construction of public utilities and for delivering public services to people in many areas of social and economic life. However, the budget deficits of governments in countries such as Jordan have required them to seek partners to assist in carrying out these functions. In other words, delivering services to people nowadays often involves contracts being concluded with private sector companies who fund and deliver governmental projects and have the skills and experience to carry out the projects efficiently. When private sector investors decide to enter into contracts with governments, they want to ensure that their investments are protected in case of a dispute with the host government. In this regard, the option to resolve disputes, including the disputes of government contracts, by alternatives to traditional judicial means has increasingly become one of the main incentives for private sector investors considering whether to enter into contracts with governments. This is because Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is more informal, cheaper, faster and easier than the formal procedures which must be adhered to in the court litigation system. Jordan is considered a poor country which has to rely on the private sector to fund its projects but, because ADR is not used in this context, investors may avoid entering into contracts with the Jordanian government, believing that their investments will not be safe. Unlike in Jordan, the use of ADR has been evident in developed countries such as the UK.This thesis argues that Jordan, as a developing country in this area, should look to other countries such as the UK which have more advanced legal systems and legislation, in order to learn from their experience. Therefore, this is a comparative study which will discuss the doctrine of legal transplant and assess whether importing ADR rules and regulations from the UK to Jordan will be an effective way of improving Jordanian laws. Accordingly, this thesis discusses (i) why ADR is not used in government contracts in Jordan and (ii) the role of ADR in settling the disputes of government contracts in the UK. It also (iii) provides solutions and makes recommendations designed to encourage the use of ADR in Jordan, including on whether or not the experience of the UK can be applied in Jordan in this regard.

在資本主義自由經濟體制下，只要有勞資互動關係，就難免會有勞資爭議。勞資爭議若處理不當，不僅勞資雙方蒙受其害，社會整體也可能因此付出相當大的代價。然我國現行之勞資爭議處理機制對預防性協調制度著墨甚少，基於勞資爭議應以自治解決之原則，於事業單位內部先行溝通處理實有其必要性。因此，本文研究之重點即探討替代爭議解決方案於企業內部運用之現況與成效，並針對下列問題進行分析： 一、何謂替代爭議解決方案？ 二、替代爭議解決方案形成之原因為何？ 三、替代爭議解決方案之形式為何？ 四、替代爭議解決方案在美國發展之現況如何？ 五、個案企業中ADR制度實地運作之情況如何？ 六、替代爭議解決方案對我國有何啟示？ 本研究發現： 一、替代爭議解決方案係企業組織為及早解決勞資糾紛，避免問題擴大、惡化，於爭議訴諸法定解決程序或司法訴訟前，先行利用調停、調處或中立第三者之協助，化解雙方歧見，尋求問題之解決。如此便無須透過政府機關之管道來解決紛爭，亦可避免曠日廢時的訴訟程序對企業營運所造成之影響，不但節省時間與成本，亦能有效的將問題予以解決。 二、替代爭議解決方案形成之原因為自1990年代起，歧視訴怨與不當解雇之訴訟案件急遽增加，鑑於此類訴訟往往纏訟經年且賠償金額極為龐大，對涉訟之勞資雙方均屬不利，因此國會與行政機關便透過立法與頒佈相關規定，鼓勵企業運用ADR解決此類紛爭。因此ADR之發展乃起因於法規的命令、法院體系的支持，加上私人契約的廣泛運用。 三、ADR之制度設計包含各種不同的形式，設置於企業內部者有門戶開放政策、監察官、跨部門檢閱小組、小型審訊、利益基礎的問題解決小組、共同解決問題與伙伴關係等形式；委託企業外機構協助者則包括催化、斡旋、調解、事實調查、仲裁、調解式仲裁、初期中立評估、爭議評議小組與解決會議等。 四、ADR之成效為藉由組織內ADR制度之運作，員工得以將職場中所遭遇之諸般問題，透過一定之程序或管道提出，使管理階層或雇主有更多機會瞭解並檢視管理制度或組織內部之各種問題，進而尋求改進或解決途徑，以防止類似問題再度發生，不僅有助於勞資關係之和諧，並能減少處理之成本，降低影響生產秩序之可能變數。 五、經由個案研究發現，ADR之制度設計與運作，皆相當重視員工之意見表達與營造開放的溝通環境，雖因個案企業各自之產業特性與組織之性質、層級、結構均不相同，但制度設計之精神均為提供組織內員工一額外之溝通管道，讓員工之問題、意見、疑慮或申訴得以及時解決，避免問題擴大惡化。 六、替代爭議解決方案之形成乃至發展，均受到美國現實環境與文化背景之影響，但美國與我國在勞資關係運作上有相當大的差異，因此ADR制度於我國未必能達到同樣或預期之效果，但仍可參酌該制度之精神與實際推行之經驗，進而研究如何將該制度之精神融入我國之現實環境與需求。而於事業單位內部建立一套申訴或解決問題之制度，可說已成為一必然趨勢，我國勞動相關法令，業已為申訴制度奠定一基礎，然而其主體建構工作，則有待企業勞資雙方逐漸形成共識。而申訴制度之有效與否，不僅在於制度之設計，企業負責人之重視程度，實為制度成功之關鍵，若能取得最高管理階層之支持，申訴制度與ADR制度方能在授權、決策公正性、結果執行力及追蹤評鑑等方面，進入有效制度之列。 最後根據本文研究所得，針對企業內部推動相關勞資爭議處理制度，作出如下建議： 一、宜培養勞資雙方自行解決爭議之觀念 二、建立企業內部解決問題之管道 三、企業主應率先確實遵守法令 四、落實員工申訴管道的有效性 五、制度設計應結合「爭議之預防」與「爭議之解決」等功能 六、制度頒行前應加強溝通宣導 七、制度之推行須符合企業文化與企業政策 八、處理期間不宜耗時過久

<p>Ny teknik ger konsumenter nya förutsättningar att handla på nätet, så kallad e-handel. Genom e-handel ges konsumenter större valmöjligheter och företag utsätts även för större krav att konkurrera med varandra, eftersom konsumenten har större tillgång till information för att fatta beslut kring köp av olika produkter. E-handeln har ökat i omfattning under de senaste åren, där det varje dag blir fler konsumenter som använder Internet för att handla olika produkter och tjänster. Genom att omfattningen av e-handeln ökar och tekniken utvecklas, blir även kraven på att konsumenterna skyddas mot oseriösa aktörer större. För att följa med i denna nya utveckling måste det finnas möjligheter för en konsument att lösa en eventuell konflikt med en näringsidkare. Frågan som uppkommer är hur konsumentskyddet inom EU kan utvecklas för att gynna relationerna mellan konsumenter och företag samt att främja och utveckla den gränsöverskridande handeln på den inre marknaden.</p><p>I uppsatsen kommer läsaren få en inblick i den problematik en konsument ställs inför, när denne hamnar i en konflikt med en näringsidkare angående en produkt eller tjänst som inhandlats via Internet, antingen här i Sverige eller utomlands. Alternativa tvistlösningsmekanismer kommer att undersökas samt i vilken utsträckning lagstiftningen inom konsumentskyddsområdet ger tillräckligt skydd för konsumenter vid e-handel. Tänkt målgrupp för uppsatsen är dels företag som erbjuder e-handel till sina kunder inom segmentet konsumentprodukter, dels jurister eller juridikstuderande som är intresserade av att få en inblick i EU:s konsumentskyddsregler samt hur alternativa tvistlösningssystem kan användas för att lösa denna typ av konflikter.</p>