Premises recovery through adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques

Purpose This paper aims to explore the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques as a legitimate means of ejection of recalcitrant tenant in property. This is with a view of providing information that will improve property investment and management. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a case study approach using five selected case studies where ADR approach was used to recover premises. Findings The experience from the case studies shows that the use of ADR in premises recovery is effective but has its challenges. In the five case studies, consent judgment, mediation and negotiation were used to recover premises in less than three months compared to an average of 18 months using litigation. Also, the cost in all the cases were lower where they exist at all than when litigation are used. The paper provides useful information to practitioners on the use of the effective alternative approach to recover premises from recalcitrant tenants. Originality/value The paper provides practical ways through which recovery of premises could be achieved through non-adversarial technique in developing property markets, which hitherto was not available in literature.