Heterocomposition and Autocomposition: Definitions, Characteristics and Examples

Heterocomposition and autocomposition they are alternative methods for the resolution of conflicts within the civil process. They are alternative methods since the one that is considered the main method to settle conflicts is the intervention of the State; in particular, the Judicial Power.

The autocomposition refers to the resolution of disputes through a voluntary private act by one of the parties or both. On the other hand, the heterocomposition refers to the resolution by a procedural body that has legal authority.

Initially, as people got together and lived together, conflicts and negotiations about possessions began. Many times a third party was the one who had to settle, dressed in the authority that gave his age or moral strength within the community, according to the criteria of that society. These were the first methods of conflict resolution.

The degree of installation of the judicial system in society is so high that the intervention of judges or courts to resolve conflicts is often understood as the main and even the only feasible solution.

When someone has a conflict, it automatically assumes that the resolution system goes through a court or a judge; However, there are other alternative methods such as heterocomposition and autocomposition, which are used effectively in conflict resolution.

Definition of h eterocomposition

It is the resolution of a dispute through the intervention of a third party that is not part of the litigation in question. That third party is not a mere presence in the process, but its decision on its resolution is binding on the parties.

The resolution taken by the third party can not be revoked nor does it admit any appeal. There are two options for the heterocompositive method: arbitration and the judicial process.

Characteristics of heterocomposition

The method of conflict resolution of the heterocomposition is characterized because it is a third party who decides and finds a solution to the dispute. This is done through one of these two processes:

Arbitration

In order for this method to be used, there must be an arbitration contract between the parties, which may be someone of their choice or a governmental body or institution.

This contract must be expressed in writing, either by means of a separate contract or as a clause in the contract that the parties formalize.

It is a very convenient dispute resolution method, since it requires less management and its cost is lower. The conventional system of conflict resolution is very slow and is usually delayed a lot due to the excess of cases that some courts have to process.

The arbitrator has the necessary legal authority to resolve the dispute through the award.

Process

In this method, the one in charge of resolving the conflict is also a third party, although in this case with the authorization and coercive force of the State; that is, the judge. Your decision regarding the dispute is irrevocable, as is the decision of the award.

Definition of atocomposition

It is about the renunciation of one's own right in favor of the rights of others. Its determination can be in two senses: unilateral and bilateral, depending on whether the two parties to the conflict reach an agreement, or if one of them gives up their rights.

In the unilateral sense of the autocomposition we find figures such as the withdrawal, the forgiveness of the offended and the acquiescence. In the bilateral sense of the autocomposition we find the transaction in which the two parties in dispute make assignments that end with the litigation.

Characteristics of the autocomposition

Its main characteristic is that it is a way to resolve the conflict without the intervention of third parties.

However, this does not mean that there are no third parties participating in the autocomposition. For example, there may be lawyers who are part of a negotiation of a conflict that ends in compromise. The key is that in the autocomposition the third parties do not have decision-making power.

Examples

Example of heterocomposition

There are two entrepreneurs who have a conflict regarding the transmission and payment of some products. One of them claims that, despite delivering the goods on time and in the agreed manner, a payment of the entire amount owed has not been made.

The other employer alleges that the goods were delivered in poor conditions and therefore the amount paid is lower, proportional to the loss of the product. Although there is a contract between the parties, this is not clear and they do not agree on how the delivery of merchandise and the consequent payment should be made.

After unsuccessfully trying a negotiation between them with a mediator, there is no other option but to appear before the courts. In this particular example, no arbitration was agreed between the parties, so they submit directly to a judge.

At this time, what is sought is to obtain a ruling indicating the procedure to be followed by the defendant, taking into account the facts, the claim made and the evidence provided. It is the judge who will declare a judgment establishing the solution to the conflict.

Example of autocomposition

An individual suffers an accident by a car that is in the name of the town hall of the city. Although this is a fact in which the administration is part, it is not an administrative act, since the situation is similar to if the event had taken place between individuals.

In this case it does not make sense to contemplate the administrative route for the resolution due to the causative event. Nor can we think that it is the administration itself that decides the accident itself, since it would be abusive.

If autotutela is eliminated as a method of solving this conflict, autocomposition may be the most appropriate method. The individual who has suffered the accident can reach an agreement on the damages and elements to be repaired, although having the administration in front is uncommon.

Normally, the autocomposition is carried out with the collaboration of two lawyers, each advising a party. Another option is a third mediator who does not have the capacity to solve the conflict but can bring positions of the parties closer; This mediator can participate at the request of one of the parties or both.

This mediator is only a collaborator so that the parties themselves find a solution. Thus, thanks to the help of the mediator, the parties can agree to an economic compensation that covers the repair of the damaged vehicle, as well as the economic detriment of the individual, since he can not use his car for his business.

References

1. Luis Octavio Vado. (2016) Alternative means of conflict resolution. Cejamericas.org.
2. Mariella Leles Da Silva (2014) Alternative methods of conflict resolution. Word.fder.edu
3. Ermo Quisberg (2018). Introduction to organic procedural law. jorgemachicado.blogspot.com
4. Legal Encyclopedia. Heterocomposition. Encyclopedia-legales.biz.com
5. Right now. (2015). Heterocomposition. derechoahorawixsite.com