Archive | Alternative Dispute Resolution – ADR RSS feed for this section

Courts Are Creeping Towards Online Adjudication

19 Mar

Below are excerpts from an article written by Maurits Barendrecht, A Professor of Private Law and Academic Director Tilburg University and Hague Institute for Internationalisation of Law: Online Courts Imminent.

“In Canada and the US, the trend towards online platforms rides on a wave of indignation about the fate of self-represented litigants. A very large proportion of users of courts cannot afford a lawyer. Others do not want to hire a lawyer, because they want to stay in control of the process themselves, needing guidance instead of directions. A well-received study by Julie MacFarlane also shows that court forms are complex, lengthy and difficult to understand, even for trained professionals. Most of these litigants end up being disillusioned about the court experience.”

“Dutch courts developed a prototype for a platform for neighbour disputes supporting diagnosis, negotiation, legal information and adjudication. Judges will be accessible online, but can also go to people’s homes in order to help implement solutions on the spot. More generally, the trend is towards a combination of online information sharing, replacing the need for repeated intake of the same problem by many professionals, in combination with more close and more human interaction.”

Below are excerpts from Julie MacFarlane’s study mentioned above:

“All the SRL’s [Self-Represented Litigants] interviewed spoke about their experience with completing court forms, and often numerous subsequent procedural aspects of their case. In many cases, these process issues dominated their experience and thus the interview; in most interviews, the process dimensions of the SRL experience – both negative and positive, but often negative – were talked about a great deal more and at greater length than their outcomes. In the 25% of cases which were concluded by the time of the interview, it was evident that the procedural aspects of the experience – – including the completion of court forms, which was often the first time a SRL realized the scale of the challenge they faced – were at least as important to the individual, as they recalled their experience, as the actual outcome.”

“Many SRL respondents described how difficult they found court forms to complete. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that, as one court clerk put it, “there a million forms out there.”135 Sometimes the clerk as well as the SRL is also seeing a particular form for the first time.”

” Virtually every SRL in the sample complained that they found the language in the court forms confusing, complex and, and some cases, simply incomprehensible – referring to terms and concepts with which they were unfamiliar. This reaction was the same across all types of litigant no matter what court or province they filed in (although there were somewhat fewer complaints about small claims court forms and procedures, these were not devoid of criticism either)…In every case, significant time and effort is required to complete court forms.”

EXCITING CHANGES ARE COMING SOON TO EQUIBBLY TO HELP YOU RESOLVE YOUR DISPUTES

16 Jan

STAY TUNED !

Coming  Soon

The Huffington Post: In Our Courts ‘Justice’ Is Bought

9 Dec

The Huffington Post

 

By Lance Soskin
President, eQuibbly

There are few elements more important to a free and democratic society than an open, fair and accessible justice system. This is never more apparent than when your liberty or livelihood is at stake.

The executive director of The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, Rebecca Love Kourlis, summed-up nicely the state of the American justice system when she said, “If you get in a car wreck, and there’s an argument about who should be paying damages, your assumption is that you can go to court to have that case resolved. The truth of the matter is that’s probably the last place you want to be, because the fees and the costs will ultimately be more than your car is worth, even if you drive a really nice car.”

Due to the nature of our adversarial justice system, it’s more often than not going to be the party with the high-priced attorney who wins in court rather than the party with the more meritorious case. Litigation is a multi-billion dollar industry that favors the wealthy. Much of that money simply lines the pockets of attorneys who charge on average between $300 and $700 an hour to tell us what the law is and how it can be manipulated in our favor to vanquish our opponents. That’s great for the small percentage of Americans who can afford a skilled lawyer, but it leaves the rest of the population at a significant disadvantage.

Even if you have a legitimate case, if your opponent has a lot more money to spend on high-priced attorneys who employ delay tactics, as Kevin O’Leary of Shark Tank and Dragon’s Den fame would say, either “you’re going to be squashed like the cockroach you are”, or those high-priced lawyers are going to have you tied-up in hearings and motions and pre-trial discovery for so many months or possibly years that you will go broke before you ever get the chance to present the full merits of your case.

Given the complexity of our laws and legal procedures, if we want any hope in hell of protecting our rights, attorneys are a necessary evil. But why should the average person or business owner need to pay tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to get the justice they’re due? If “ignorance of the law is no excuse” when it comes to determining liability or culpability, would it not make more sense for the government to ensure that the laws and procedures can easily be understood by the average person? Shouldn’t justice, in the true sense of the word, be available to everyone?

Although America prides itself on having a fair and accessible government-run justice system, the truth is that for most of us, justice is neither fair, nor easily accessible. The American justice system faces serious issues that are not easily resolved and will not be resolved any time soon without drastic reform. Most of us want, and in fact need, options that are cheaper, quicker and less complicated than going to court or hiring an attorney to fight all our battles. We need to make better use of alternative dispute resolution options such as mediation and arbitration. Given our shrinking budgets, both governments and personal, what other options do we have?

European Parliament Votes In New Law Providing For Online Dispute Resolution

4 Dec

Earlier this year the European Parliament adopted two key legislative measures regarding the resolution of consumer disputes in Europe. The new regulation mandates that all businesses selling goods or services to consumers online in any European Union member state, excluding those in the health and education sectors, make available a link to a EU-wide online platform that will be set up to handle consumer disputes.

The directive requires all EU member states to implement the Online Dispute Resolution initiative within 2 years of the regulation’s entry into force. The directive applies to any purchase made domestically or across EU borders.

The official press release can be seen below.

European Commission

MEMO

Brussels, 12 March 2013

A step forward for EU consumers: Commissioner Tonio Borg welcomes adoption of Out-of-court Dispute Resolution

Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy, Tonio Borg, welcomed the vote of the European Parliament on Alternative Dispute Resolution and Online Dispute Resolution (ADR-ODR) today. This vote confirms the agreement on the two proposals put forward by the European Commission in 2011.

Tonio Borg said: “Today, the European Parliament confirmed its agreement on two key proposals for boosting growth in the Single Market and strengthening the Digital economy. ADR and ODR are a win-win for consumers, who will be able to resolve their disputes out-of-court in a simple, fast and low-cost manner, and also for traders who will be able to keep good relations with customers and avoid litigation costs. It must be stressed that the EU institutions achieved a fast agreement which will significantly improve everyday life for consumers across Europe”.

He also added: “I want to take this opportunity to thank the rapporteurs of the two proposals at the European Parliament, Louis Grech and Róża Thun, for their commitment to reach an agreement. I am also grateful to the Member States and the Presidencies of the Council for their intensive work on these files. This is a truly inter-institutional achievement to boost consumers’ and traders’ confidence in the internal market and its digital dimension.”

The rules on ADR will ensure that consumers can turn to quality alternative dispute resolution entities for all kinds of contractual disputes that they have with traders; no matter what they purchased1 and whether they purchased it online or offline, domestically or across borders.

According to the ODR Regulation, an EU-wide online platform will be set up for handling consumer disputes that arise from online transactions. The platform will link all the national alternative dispute resolution entities and operate in all official EU languages.

Raising consumers’ awareness is another pillar of this legislation, as traders will need to provide consumers with adequate information on ADR and ODR.

Member States will have two years to implement the ADR/ODR rules. The ODR platform will be operational at the end of 2015.

For more information:

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/adr_en.htm

Source: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-192_en.htm?locale=en

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 369 other followers

%d bloggers like this: