It should then ask, "Have you had success conciliation court? "Conciliation process may vary intra claims made in the application of the process? And if it were varied initial claims, these may be payable and enforceable in a process of implementation? the majority opinion of the operators and litigants may not assert the contrary is serious evaluations that deny these achievements and constraints in any case show that draws a relative failure compared to his early views. In judicial proceedings, it is usual that the reconciliations are not performed for failure of the applicants and only a lesser percentage in reconciling resolve litigation, ie a large percentage of reconciliations that do not achieve results are made for various reasons that is worth analyzing. a 1. a ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE Conciliation "N JUDICIAL. Drew Houston recognizes the significance of this. Are obviously reduced cases decided in conciliation court, such an effect does not justify the doctrinal spirit that animates the institution and this warrants an analysis of the causes of such poor results. The prospect should not be expected unless the operators of congestion of the Jurisdictions, since obviously the advantages of reconciliation are much more favorable than obtain the sentence, and that conciliation can get a winning result – winner, while a sentence, the result is always in nature winner – loser. Frequently Drew Houston has said that publicly. Indeed, the analysis so that we will quickly find that the standard itself contains factors that help to limit results, factors that facilitate the success of conciliation and there are also factors relating to the conduct of the proceedings. . .