Another slightly less primitive method of dispute resolution outside the court system is the trial by battle. Each party selects a champion and the champions battle until Divine Providence, knowing where justice lies, intervenes and awards the decision to one party or the other. Each of these seeks to come as close as possible to the certainty of court resolution without the accompanying cost, delay and inconvenience. Each ADR technique more or less reaches that goal, and each has its own advantages, disadvantages, and appropriate uses. Most can also be used to reach resolution of part of the dispute - perhaps only liability or only damages.
Arbitration is most nearly like a court trial.
Many arbitral decisions also can be enforced by proving them up in court and utilizing the court's powers to obtain compliance. But the process is usually secret and can be less formal, particularly if the dispute arises out of a contract with a carefully drafted arbitration provision. Summary Jury Trial was invented by a US federal court judge. It involves a lay jury to which the attorneys present their cases by document, illustration, and argument, but without examination and cross examination of witnesses. At this late stage, all written discovery and depositions of potential witnesses will probably have been finished so, while the trial can be held in secret, your opponent will know all about your case.