Janis Sarra (ed) An Exploration of Fairness (Carswell) pp.241-250, 2013
In this chapter, I consider the various ways in which the idea of fairness is given content in this dispute resolution regime and try to understand how and why some of these ideas achieve legitimacy and some do not. A few framing comments should be made. First, the context for the analysis of fairness in this regime is that of two-party disputes, a context with which lawyers arc very familiar. On the other hand, the basic premise of the kinds of dispute resolution services discussed in this chapter is that they arc outside the formal legal system. For example, Gilad argues that the system of informal dispute resolution practiced by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) in the United Kingdom is "explicitly designed to offset some of the advantages enjoyed by RPs [repeat players] in court litigation". Nor are such processes intended to be directly "regulatory", in the sense that they are not intended to usurp the role of regulators in establishing appropriate norms and standards for firm-client interaction or investigating breaches of regulatory or self-regulatory requirements. Instead, they are focused on redress for clients on a relatively informal, case-by-case basis.
Condon, Mary, "Ideas of Fairness in Financial Services Dispute Resolution" (2013). Articles & Book Chapters. 2787.