Online Dispute Resolution
2
Citation
0
Reference
20
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
The main objectives of this paper are to demystify cyberjustice, which is often referred to as online dispute resolution (ODR), and to document its early period. What does ODR really mean? What does it presuppose? The paper explains what information and communication technologies actually and potentially can bring to the administration of justice. It describes in accessible terms the nuts and bolts of online dispute resolution and relates the principal early ODR experiments. There are many areas in which cyberjustice can be used, but so far few have received concrete, sustained attention. Such attention could usefully be turned to the strong potential of ODR, which merits investigation. The strictly legal aspects of the phenomenon are also discussed. How can state law accommodate the role of the private sector in developing ODR? What are the legal obstacles to deploying ODR? The last section of the paper provides a detailed presentation of the first sui generis online arbitration system : the domain name dispute resolution application developed by eResolution.Keywords:
Phenomenon
Presentation (obstetrics)
Cite
Online dispute resolution can be roughly categorised in into online negotiation, online mediation, and online arbitration. Online negotiation means direct communication between the parties via electronic means. Online mediation involves a neutral third party communicating with and between the parties by online means to facilitate negotiation and encourage the parties to reach a settlement. Online arbitration involves a neutral third party, the arbitrator, with the competence to hear the arguments of the parties and make a decision on the merits of the dispute. In online arbitration process, submission of documents, text-based hearings, and live hearings may be carried out via electronic communication over the internet. In ODR processes, certain principles have to be followed. The neutrals must be impartial and independent. The ODR services must be affordable for the parties. The dispute resolution process must be transparent. The proceedings must be fair. As far as effectiveness is concerned, the dispute resolution process should not be protracted beyond a reasonable period of time, and the result must be implemented effectively. In Taiwan, ODR can serve as an alternative to civil proceedings to avoid complicated legal issues and enhance consumer confidence. The Taiwanese laws do not prohibit the conducting of ADR processes over the internet. The legal status of electronic signature and electronic document in ODR proceedings is also recognised. There is no legal obstacle for ODR in Taiwan.
Electronic signature
Cite
Citations (1)
The purpose of this study is to analyze the urgency of arrangements regarding Online Arbitration in dispute resolution on e-commerce transactions and to analyze the conceptualization of Online Arbitration in dispute resolution on e-commerce transactions. This research uses the statue approach to analyzing and tracing the regulations related to Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and trade disputes. The legal material analysis technique was carried out by using the descriptive analysis method. ODR must have a clear legal basis. But in reality, in Indonesia until now the ODR does not have a legal basis even though in several laws and regulations it has opened opportunities for ODR to enter and also in article 72 paragraph (2) of the Government Regulation No. 80 of 2019 concerning Trade Through Electronic System states that settlement of disputes through electronic systems can be resolved via ODR. The ODR concept, especially online arbitration, which will be adopted by Indonesia, can be implemented by first reformulating existing regulations, particularly in Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Other Alternative Dispute Resolution. By reformulating the rules contained in the Law, it can be used as a rule that also underlies the use of ODR in Indonesia. Incorporating the ODR concept into Indonesia is also carried out by making comparisons with other countries that have used it first so that Indonesia has an overview and inspiration in making the concept of ODR in Indonesia.
Settlement (finance)
Paragraph
Cite
Citations (1)
Technology is revolutionizing the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) field. Despite the long-held assumptions that increasing understanding, building empathy, and crafting resolution are only possible in-person, effective ways have emerged for assisting the resolution of the exploding number of disputes that have burgeoned online. Technology has become the “fourth party” through the growing field of online dispute resolution (ODR), which includes use of technology and computer-mediated-communication (CMC) in negotiation, mediation, arbitration and other dispute resolution processes. ODR is infiltrating family law and even courts are starting to employ ODR in family cases. Expedited divorces and tracking parenting plans with little court involvement garner appeal amidst growing expectation that everything should be available with a few “clicks” or “swipes” on our technological devices. These expectations and opportunities place new responsibilities on the field and its practitioners. How can we best integrate technology into ADR—both online and off? How can we prevent the rush to digitization from ignoring due process and transparency in the name of efficiency? Accordingly, this Article will discuss the value of ODR for family disputes and highlight key concepts and ODR standards to consider for ethical design and employment of technology in family dispute resolution.
This is the submitted version of the article. The published version may be found at 59 Family Court Review 250 (April 2021) Wiley Online Library
Lawyer supported mediation
Cite
Citations (5)
Scholars, judges, and the organized Bar have begun to see Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) as a partial answer to the “access to justice” problem faced by people of limited means, and even the “wave of the future” for most if not all forms of civil dispute resolution. Attracted by the possibility of faster, cheaper, and more convenient dispute resolution, companies, states of the union, and countries around the world now have begun to create ODR programs on a scale that makes the process, along with outsourcing, AI-based practice management software, and non-traditional legal service providers, one of the principal forces redefining the traditional practice of law. Often overlooked in this cost and convenience uber alles perspective is whether the cheap and efficient processing of disputes is a capitulation to the conditions of modern society more than a superior system for administering justice. Most ODR programs require parties to describe their claims in fixed, predefined categories that may or may not capture all of the claims’ dimensions; limit the opportunity to argue the substantive merits underlying the claims worth; and resolve differences on the basis of private software algorithms that raise fairness issues not present in dispute resolution systems run principally by humans. It’s a little too soon to know if this “wave” of the future breaks on the beach or the rocks.I discuss the foregoing issues in the following manner. In Part II, I provide a brief overview of ODR systems, describing the largest, most well known, and most sophisticated platforms now in place. In Part III, I describe certain legal, political, and moral concerns yet to be addressed in the ODR literature, and identify some of the unintended consequences the widespread adoption of ODR systems might produce. Finally, in Part IV, I describe the questions ODR proponents must answer, and the refinements they must make to existing models, if online systems are to satisfy the demands of state-sanctioned, public dispute resolution
Cite
Citations (13)
Virtual courthouses, artificial intelligence (AI) for determining cases, and algorithmic analysis for all types of legal issues have captured the interest of judges, lawyers, educators, commentators, business leaders, and policymakers. Technology has become the “fourth party” in dispute resolution through the growing field of online dispute resolution (ODR), which includes the use of a broad spectrum of technologies in negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and other dispute resolution processes. Indeed, ODR shows great promise for expanding access to remedies, or justice. In the United States and abroad, however, ODR has mainly thrived within e-commerce companies like eBay and Alibaba, while most public courts have continued to insist on traditional face-to-face procedures. Nonetheless, e-courts and public ODR pilots are developing throughout the world in particular contexts such as small claims and property tax disputes, and are demonstrating how technology can be used to further efficiency and expand access to the courts. Accordingly, this Article explores these e-court initiatives with a critical eye for ensuring fairness, due process, and transparency, as well as efficiency, in public dispute resolution.
Cite
Citations (1)
Abstract Effective dispute settlement is regarded as one of the means of enhancing consumer confidence in cross-border purchases over the Internet. Yet, studies of online dispute resolution (ODR) show, on the whole, poor uptake of ODR by the public. This paper is based on a research project carried out by the authors (funded by the European Parliament) which explored why so few people resort to ODR and what are the implications of low uptake for consumer confidence in cross-border e-commerce. The authors expand the traditional definition of ODR and introduce a distinction between what they term 'hard' or traditional ODR processes and the more novel 'soft' ODR processes. The low uptake of 'hard' ODR is critically considered, as are the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of 'hard' and 'soft' ODR. Successful examples of one 'hard' and one 'soft' ODR mechanism are reviewed. The authors conclude with considering the implications for EU ODR policy in the short, medium and long term.
Redress
Settlement (finance)
Cite
Citations (47)
The COVID‐19 pandemic has forced the legal system (both domestic and worldwide) to adapt in unprecedented ways. Often, this has meant taking initial forays into the world of online dispute resolution, or ODR. In this manner, courts, mediators, arbitrators, and other legal professionals have been able to provide expanded access from a safe distance. Indeed, if ODR services continue to develop, they show the potential to make legal services more convenient and less costly from this point forward. ODR has demonstrated particular applicability in facilitating divorce negotiations, but it has not been time‐tested, and we must make sure that this apparent democratization does not bring with it degradation in the quality of service. There is now an urgent need for analysis and evaluation of the full breadth of ODR technologies, so that they may be put to use appropriately without delay, and this task falls to legal scholarship. This article explores the past and present of the ODR landscape, performs a cost–benefit analysis of some of ODR's more controversial aspects, and finally proposes a viable way forward, such that every stakeholder is treated with the respect and dignity that they deserve.
Dignity
Scope (computer science)
Cite
Citations (4)
The main objectives of this paper are to demystify cyberjustice, which is often referred to as online dispute resolution (ODR), and to document its early period. What does ODR really mean? What does it presuppose? The paper explains what information and communication technologies actually and potentially can bring to the administration of justice. It describes in accessible terms the nuts and bolts of online dispute resolution and relates the principal early ODR experiments. There are many areas in which cyberjustice can be used, but so far few have received concrete, sustained attention. Such attention could usefully be turned to the strong potential of ODR, which merits investigation. The strictly legal aspects of the phenomenon are also discussed. How can state law accommodate the role of the private sector in developing ODR? What are the legal obstacles to deploying ODR? The last section of the paper provides a detailed presentation of the first sui generis online arbitration system : the domain name dispute resolution application developed by eResolution.
Cite
Citations (4)
Traditional judicial mechanisms did not offer an adequate solution for cross-border electronic commerce disputes. Although there has been expected great potential in solving disputes online and the rise of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) use, the assumptions has not been confirmed yet. Only a few examples demonstrate the success stories of ODR, which is in big contrast to the continuous growth of electronic transactions and in general with the use of the online environment. The European Commission however understood the potential of ODR and it is trying to foster the use of it by adopting the ODR Regulation and the ADR Directive. Such legal framework has been developed to apply in consumer disputes arising out of sales or providing services between an EU consumer and an EU trader.The ADR Directive sets out basic standards of ADR entities and processual rules under which it is possible to solve the dispute. Then under the ODR Regulation the complainant will be able to submit a complaint using the ODR platform. The complaint (and any related documentation) will be submitted to the ODR platform via an electronic form.Yet it is necessary to assess the risks of above mentioned legal framework. One of the great concerns are connected with possible forum shopping while providers are registering as ADR entities. Experienced trader (unlike the consumer) is able to choose ADR provider, which is more likely to decide in his favour. Possible exclusion of online negotiation or even online tools in general is then further underlining possible. The paper will thus assess main legal aspects of ADR / ODR legal framework of European Union Law and will deal with main problematic parts of it.
Complaint
Directive
Electronic signature
Cite
Citations (5)
Abstract Online dispute resolution (ODR) refers to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes such as mediation, negotiation, and arbitration, conducted with the assistance of online information and communication technologies (ICTs). ODR typically uses tools such as e‐mail, instant messaging, and bulletin boards, but some theorists expand the definition to include video‐ or telephone conferencing and even communication via mobile phones and community radio. Online information management that is part of a dispute resolution process, such as e‐filing of court documents, is also considered ODR. ODR can be used to resolve disputes that occur in the online world, such those over purchases on eBay, and also those that arise in the offline world, such as business or family disputes. However, websites that simply provide information about ODR are not included in the definition, because ODR necessitates that some resolution of the dispute is attempted. This essay briefly reviews the history and different applications of ODR and delineates some of the key topics in the literature, including legal and regulatory issues, trust, communication, efficiency, culture, and the applicability of ICTs in different regions of the world.
Videoconferencing
Cite
Citations (3)