LAGUNA STATE POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW

COURSE SYLLABUS
I. COURSE TITLE: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Arbitration in the Philippines
II. COURSE DESCRIPTION: This subject is a study of the Law on Alternative Dispute Resolution that covers the different kinds of dispute resolution
mechanisms, its history and importance. It differentiates litigation and other ADR processes, e.g. conciliation, mediation,
arbitration and other ADR processes. The subject also deals with arbitration laws, e.g. its primary sources, advantages &
disadvantages, the art of mediation and arbitration. Methodology includes class discussion and role playing.
III. COURSE CREDIT: 2 Units
IV. GENERAL OBJECTIVES: a) To enable the students to understand the different dispute resolution processes and how they differ from each other.
b. To better appreciate that ADR is the preferred mode of settling disputes between parties and change one’s mindset that
lawyering is only about litigation.
c) To heighten awareness as to how ADR is used in other countries and in the Philippines to settle conflicts.
d) To train students as to how to handle negotiations as a key ingredient in lawyering.
e) To synthesize the various concepts on conflict resolution mechanisms and its applicability to certain situations.
V. COURSE OUTLINE:
Specific Objectives Contents Strategies/Activities Instruction Material
*To orient students about the basics * Introduction: *Incorporating research *Textbook of Jim Lopez entitled “Law
of Alternative Dispute Resolution  What is Alternative Dispute Resolution? using materials of the on Alternative Dispute Resolution
*To familiarize students with the  Overview of the Philippine Judicial System Supreme Court and (Private Justice in the Philippines)
structure of the Philippine Judicial  Filing of Lawsuit other law related
System websites; *Website of the Supreme Court
*To provide students with an www.supremecourt.gov.ph
overview on the stages of civil and a *Class discussion on *Powerpoint presentations
criminal action what the students know
about the present state
of the Philippine
judiciary;

*Discussion outlining
the difference between
civil and criminal
actions
*To underscore the importance of
ADR and its use in averting a full
blown case
*To understand how ADR evolved
through time in the Philippines
*To heighten one’s awareness on the
various modes of settling disputes in
the Philippines
* To distinguish between statutory
arbitration and the concept of
arbitration under RA 9285
* To comprehend the value of
mediation and contrast court
annexed from court referred
mediation
* To better appreciate the legal basis  Executive Order No. 523, Series of 2006or
of the ADR law and the corresponding
treaties and convention
* To understand the various legal
sources of ADR
*Why is there a need for Alternative Dispute
Resolution?
 Historical Background
 Court Delays
 Settlement of Disputes in the Philippines
- Conflict Resolution, Filipino Style
- Filipino Conflict Management
- Katarungang Pambarangay
*Statutory Arbitration and Introduction on the
Concept of Arbitration under RA 9285
*Concept of Mediation:
 Court Annexed Mediation
 Court Referred Mediation
*Statutes:
 Resolution Act of 2004 or Republic Act No.
9285
 The Arbitration Law or Republic Act No. 876
 Construction Industry Arbitration Law or
Executive Order No. 1008
Department Circular No. 98, series of 2009
 Rules of Court
 Special ADR Rules
 Section 6 (a) of Rule 18 of the Rules of Court
 Supreme Court Resolution A.M. No. 01- 10-5-
SC-PHILJA, October 16, 2001, specifically the
second Revised Guidelines for the
Implementation of Mediation Proceedings
 Supreme Court Resolution A.M. No. 04-3- 15-
SC-PHILJA, March 23, 2004, specifically
Resolution No. 02-04 thereof on the
Implementing Rules and Regulations on
Mediation in the Trial Courts.
 Treaties:
*Lectures; *Textbook of Jim Lopez* Alternative
*Class discussion; dispute Resolution
*Case study analysis;
*Article on Arbitration – Lawyers
*Oral Recitation
Review by Laurence Hector Arroyo
*Role playing Group
(March 31, 2007)
reporting – each group
would be assigned a *Secs. 399 to 422 of the Local
certain Law/concept to Government Code
discuss *Alternative Dispute Resolution Act
*Case analysis done of 2004 or Republic Act No. 9285
through oral recitation
*The Arbitration Law or Republic Act
No. 876
*Construction Industry Arbitration
Law or Executive Order No. 1008
*Executive Order No. 523, Series of
2006
*Section 6 (a) of Rule 18 of the Rules
of Court
*Supreme Court Resolution A.M. No.
01-10-5-SCPHILJA, October 16, 2001,
specifically the second Revised
Guidelines for the Implementation of
Mediation Proceedings
*Supreme Court Resolution A.M. No.
04-3-15-SCPHILJA, March 23, 2004,
specifically Resolution No. 02-04
thereof on the Implementing Rules
and Regulations on Mediation in the
Trial Courts.
*Special ADR Rules

* To apply the provisions of the ADR
as it relates to the cases given
 Convention on the Recognition of *Convention on the Recognition of
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
York Convention, 1958) Awards (New York Convention, 1958)
 Convention on the Settlement on Investment
*Convention on the Settlement on
Disputes Between States and Nationals of
Investment Disputes Between States
Other States (Washington Convention, 1966)
and Nationals of Other States
 UNICITRAL Model Law on International
(Washington Convention, 1966)
Commercial Arbitration
1. Heirs of Augusto Salas vs. Laperal Realty Corp, GR No. 135362,Dec. 13, 1999
2. Del Monte Corp-USA vs. CA(351 SCRA 373,381
3. National Steel Corp vs. The RTC of Lanao del Norte, Branch 2, Iligan City, GR No. 127004, 11 Mar. 1999
4. Asset Privatization Trust vs. CA , GR No. 121171, 29 December 1998
5. NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION (NIA), petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS (4th Division),
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARBITRATION COMMISSION, and HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS
CORPORATION, respondents, G.R. No. 129169. November 17, 1999
6. Agan vs. Phil. Intl Air Terminals Co., Inc, (PIATCO), GR No. 155001, 5 May 2003
7. LM POWER ENGINEERING CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. CAPITOL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION GROUPS, INC.,
respondent., G.R. No. 141833. March 26, 2003
8. Charles Bernard H. Reyes vs. Antonio Yulo Balde II, GR No. 168384, 7 August 2006
9. Maria Luisa Park Association Inc vs. Samantha Marie T. Almendras and Pia Marie T. Almendras, G.R. No.
171763, June 5, 2009
10. Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation v. Domingo, G.R. No. 180765, February 27, 2009; 580 SCRA 397;
11. Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation v. Sorongon & Fong, G.R. No. 176709, May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 613
12. HUTAMARSEA JOINT OPERATIONS, INC. v. CITRA METRO MANILA TOLLWAYS CORPORATION [G.R. No. 180640,
April 24, 2009 (3rd Div., Chico Nazario, J.)
13. Equitable PCI Banking Corporation, et al v. RCBC Capital Corporation,G.R. No. 182248, December 18, 2008;
Luzon Hydro Corporation v. Hon. Rommel O. Baybay, etc and Transfield Philippines, Inc., CA-G.R. Sp. No. 94318,
November 29, 2005
14. Empire East Land Holdings, Inc. v. Capitol Industrial Construction Groups, Inc., G.R. No. 168074, Sept 26, 2008
15. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. World Interactive Network Systems [WINS] Japan Co., Ltd., G.R. No.
169332, February 11, 2008
16. Diesel Construction Co., Inc. v. UPSI Property Holdings, Inc.G.R. No. 154885; UPSI Property Holdings, Inc. v.
Diesel Construction Co.,Inc. and FGU Insurance Corp., G.R. No. 154937, March 24, 2008
17. Korea Technologies Co., Ltd. v. Hon. Alberto A. Lerma and Pacific General Steel Manufacturing Corporation,
G.R. No. 143581, Jan. 7, 2008