The growth of the electronic communications sector and the changes in its regulatory framework have increased the genuine need for an efficient dispute resolution system.
The most appropriate dispute resolution mechanism and forum may vary depending on the maturity of a country's telecommunications market, its regulatory framework and general business culture, and the underlying disputed issues and policies. Nevertheless, the parties' expectations appear to converge towards the following attributes of any particular dispute resolution mechanism:
- certainty
- timeliness
- quality
- fairness
- effectiveness
We appreciate this will not be entirely scientific, but we are attempting to survey the key stakeholders' degree of confidence in relying on the available dispute resolution methods in the communications sector in their respective jurisdictions.
If you have been involved in telecoms disputes or you otherwise have knowledge of this topic, your opinion is sought in respect of the degree of certainty, timeliness, quality, fairness and effectiveness of the resolution of telecoms disputes through court, arbitration, regulatory adjudication, competition authority or other means (e.g. mediation, conciliation etc.) in your jurisdiction.
To complete this brief survey, please click here. The questionnaire will remain open until 30 November 2008 and its results will be shared once collated and analysed.
Your specific feedback will be kept strictly confidential and neither you nor your organization will be identified in any manner in the publication of the results of our survey. We appreciate your contribution to making our survey as representative as possible.
This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq
Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.
The original publication date for this article was 19/11/2008.
