Court should be the last resort in settling disputes, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said yesterday.
He told MSPs that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) such as arbitration, adjudication and mediation could "enable people to resolve their disputes more quickly and effectively".
Building up expertise in ADR could lead to Scotland becoming recognised as an international leader in the field and somewhere to which global companies could take their disagreements, boosting the Scottish economy, he said.
Mr MacAskill said Scotland was "perhaps too reliant on traditional adversarial processes and laws.
"My aspiration is to make use of the formal court system the remedy of last resort rather than the remedy of first resort," he said.
Pressed by Tory MSP Gavin Brown on whether the Scottish Government would use ADR, Mr MacAskill said: "I don't think I can give that formal commitment because it depends on each and every matter. We would have to reserve the right to litigate and litigate urgently and immediately."
The minister told MSPs that at least one aspect of Scots law on arbitration dated back to 1695 and it needed to be modernised.
"The unsatisfactory state of the law here makes Scotland an unattractive place in which to arbitrate. As world trade continues to expand, there will be increasing demand for high-quality arbitration services to resolve cross border commercial disputes," he said.
He said an Arbitration Bill to modernise the system would be issued for consultation next spring.
The government wanted to develop a dispute resolution centre, which could attract international arbitration cases as well as domestic one.
"Scotland should be an easy place to do business and it needs the law and courts to back this up and make Scotland the jurisdiction of choice for resolution of disputes."
For Labour, Pauline McNeill said that at its highest level ADR was about "solving disputes and differences between commercial companies across national borders" but she said it could also help those who could not afford to take cases to the civil courts, including people involved in family disputes.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article