Key Factors Influencing Adoption of Online Dispute Resolution in Banking Sector: An Empirical Analysis

Online dispute resolution (ODR) systems have the potential to resolve cases before they end up in court, reducing costs for litigants and easing the burden of court caseloads. We have limited experience with ODR in the United States, but other countries have found ODR to be helpful even for people without attorneys. In this chapter, Michael Wolf describes international ODR systems and reviews studies that show benefits to unrepresented parties. An ODR mediator can use this technology to conduct intake, gather preliminary documents, and engage parties in a structured online negotiation, making ADR more accessible and affordable to low- and moderate-income Americans. This chapter describes how international courts use online dispute resolution systems (ODR) to reduce costs and enable litigants to more effectively and efficiently resolve disputes. Courts in the United States can similarly use ODR to overcome hurdles that result from not being represented by a lawyer. One way to lower barriers to access to justice is to resolve disputes outside the traditional court system. For almost three decades, American courts, from federal circuits to small claims, have been adopting ADR systems and empaneling dispute resolution practitioners to help manage court caseloads. Mediation and other types of court-annexed ADR systems generally are not best suited to parties who are looking for vindication, want to establish precedent, or want to maximize short-term recovery. Instead, the most satisfied users of ADR systems tend to be litigants who value quick results, privacy, simplicity, relationship retention, outcome compliance, and who want to minimize cost, risk, time, formality, and conflict. Courts can play an important role in the ADR process by using collaborative technology that enables parties to choose methods of dispute resolution other than traditional litigation. This approach can help alleviate the overcrowded dockets of courts around the country, and ODR technologies can provide a less legalistic and more intuitive mechanism for resolving disputes. Courts might find it cost-effective to also adopt an approved set of online workspaces through which empaneled dispute resolution practitioners can leverage ADR and ODR systems to improve access. Associations of dispute resolution practitioners, local bar associations, and even the Legal Services Corporation might share the tasks of testing and recommending preferred online workspaces and helping with licensing and training.

The Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) system has been designed as a method to achieve Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). According to the UNCTAD, ODR has had significant success in China. China has been especially active in promoting the utilization of ODR systems in resolving consumer disputes. Following a thorough analysis of the current mechanisms and practices of consumer ODR in China, this paper endeavours to present two arguments. Firstly, consumer ODR in China is more than a means of moving ADR online. On the one hand, the “Internet Plus” strategy has facilitated the digitalisation of the public sector, including the development of “Smart Courts” and “Digital Government” services. On the other hand, innovative mechanisms implemented by the private sector, such as Crowdsourced ODR and Platform ODR, have effectively provided alternative channels for resolving consumer disputes, in addition to the public channels. Secondly, this article identifies a number of challenges currently facing China’s consumer ODR system. These challenges encompass both legal issues and cultural and linguistic diversity concerns.

E-commerce is overshadowing face-to-face (F2F) transactions in business-to-consumer (B2C) commerce. This benefits consumers in providing more buying options, but may leave them with no remedies when purchases go awry. This chapter therefore discusses how online dispute resolution (ODR) systems may expand and equalize remedy systems in B2C exchanges. Part II of the chapter discusses the need for expanded ODR to provide consumers with access to remedies regarding online purchases. Part III explains how ODR systems are unfolding on international and domestic fronts in B2C exchanges. Part IV then highlights their strengths and weaknesses and proposes ideas for how ODR systems can be improved to offer consumers efficient and fair means for accessing e-commerce remedies. The chapter concludes with Part V, an invitation to continue the development of such ODR systems in an effort to foster revived corporate responsibility and empower all consumers regardless of their resources, power, or status.

Facilitating Expansion of Cross-Border E-Commerce-Developing a Global Online Dispute Resolution System (Lessons Derived from Existing ODR Systems - Work of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law)

The existence of law and culture has bring significant forces to human life, since them both shaping and influencing the emergence of values and norms in communities and societies. The restless development of human history has forged law in dynamic relation with culture, resulted in changing laws, values and practices. Beyond politics, present life is also bringing fresh challenges for law and culture globally, such as: the increased use of technology in law and human life. One of the big leap issue is the changing in the culture of trade, which shifted to non-face-to face or e commerce, which offer easiness and practicality in conduct trade regardless the non-barrier border. Indeed, there is still a lack of effective legal regimes and processes capable to meet the needs of globalization. The increased possibilities to access information, to form online relationships, and to conclude online transactions have introduced a new dimension of legal conflicts, which is electronic disputes. Regarding this issue, the needs of effective dispute settlement, which is “fitting to the forum”, is necessary, and online dispute resolution (ODR) is the answer. Therefore this paper aims to find how ODR reshaping the prospect of dispute settlement and what obstacle may be faced by the implementation of ODR. The method use in this paper is juridical normative with conceptual approach, statute approach and comparative approach. The result of this paper show that ODR able to reshape the prospect of dispute settlement, since it may offer fairness by providing transparent system of negotiation, trust in content offer by ODR system and security develop in ODR system in the process of dispute settlement. Meanwhile, there are also obstacles that may face by ODR, which are technology issue and local culture issue, which means the acceptance of ODR practice in society, especially when applied to developing country.

In recent decades, e-commerce has gradually become a thriving industry that generated a huge profit and enhanced the life quality of nations around the world, including Vietnam. Nevertheless, the development of the Vietnamese e-commerce industry has also engendered a handful of consumer disputes that could not be easily resolved through traditional, face-to-face dispute resolution methods. A consumer redress system that addresses e-commerce transactions is essential to the continued success and growth of e-commerce. In this paper, we argue that traditional domestic judicial mechanisms for legal recourse do not adequately satisfy the needs of consumers or vendors and propose an online dispute resolution (ODR) system as a more reasonable, efficient and fair alternative. The ODR system will provide a forum in the same virtual marketplace environment in which consumers purchase their goods or services, allowing broad accessibility, as well as swift and affordable recourse for the parties involved. This paper will more specifically discuss the EU experience in promoting the ODR system for consumer e-commerce disputes, which can serve as a reference for the policy makers in establishing the legal framework for ODR in Vietnam. In addition, this paper also suggests a specific set of guidelines for the essential attributes that must be present in the Vietnamese consumer ODR platform.

An Electronic Health Record (EHR) is an individual’s record of all health events that enables critical information to be documented and shared electronically amongst health care providers and patients. The introduction of an EHR, particularly a patient-accessible EHR, can be expected to lead to an escalation of enquiries, complaints and ultimately, disputes. Prevailing opinion is that Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) systems can help with the mediation of certain types of disputes electronically, particularly systems which deploy Artificial Intelligence (AI) to reduce the need for a human mediator. However, disputes regarding health tend to invoke emotional responses from patients that may conceivably impact ODR efficacy. This raises an interesting question on the influence of emotional intelligence (EI) in the process of mediation. Using a phenomenological research methodology simulating doctor–patient disputes mediated with an AI Smart ODR system in place of a human mediator, we found an association between EI and the propensity for a participant to change their previously asserted claims. Our results indicate participants with lower EI tend to prolong resolution compared to those with higher EI. Future research include trialling larger scale ODR systems for specific cohorts of patients in the area of health related dispute resolution are advanced.

Emerging cyberjustice systems are in need of relevant requirements engineering approaches, for example, to provide citizens with better access to the judicial system. In this context, this paper proposes the use of goal modeling for developing Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) systems in Canada. With ODR, the use of technology has the potential of increasing access to justice at low cost. We argue that a goal-oriented view is needed to capture early requirements about who are the stakeholders, what goals and quality criteria they have and how the various enabling technologies can be combined to meet these goals. A particular case is made for the use of the Goal-oriented Requirement Language (GRL), which covers the above and enables trade-off analysis as well as the introduction of indicators for measurement activities. GRL also has the potential of being used to guide some run-time decisions in ODR systems.

This paper explores the potential role of online dispute resolution (ODR) in family disputes. Following recent reforms in family law in Australia, primary dispute resolution processes (PDR) such as mediation have become the default process for the majority of cases in which there are disputes over parenting or property. PDR processes can potentially be enhanced by the use of information and communication technology. But despite potential benefits for some categories of disputants, the application of ODR to family disputes has been little explored. We identify and classify nine ODR systems that have relevance to family disputes. While further research and system development is needed, we conclude that ODR remains an interesting if not yet fully developed new tool for family dispute resolution practitioners. As the increased use of information and communication technology and the Internet influence the way in which services are delivered, practitioners and providers of dispute resolution services would do well to anticipate that some clients will want ODR offered as an option for facilitating family disputes.

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) could be the first important step towards adjusting the public Administration to the requirements of the digital era by introducing new e-disputes. In this context, this article examines the significance of the emergence of consumer ODR systems in EU as a new mechanism for resolving disputes, online ones included. It takes a theoretical research approach to evaluate the nature and scope of ODR development in the emerging field of e-governance and combine it with a comparative data analysis to identify the core positive and negative challenges in the use of ODR. Some EU member states have already adopted ODR as a tool for digital e-government and others are still in the period of its implementation. ODR has already proved effective resolution for at least some disputes (e.g. cross-border disputes), but unfortunately has not yet reached its full potential. The lack of relevant ODR case law is another issue that contributes to only gradual usage of ODR systems and their efficiency. Key findings are formulated as a list of challenges that EU has to face for efficient use of ODR and it as an important part within innovative European e-governance in the future.

The current court system is simply not conducive to ordinary people and small businesses for the resolution of low value claims at proportionate costs, speed and efficiency. Moreover, the lack of knowledge of e-Commerce consumers in online dispute resolution (ODR) and limitation of independent ODR platform in Malaysia has led to consumer dissatisfaction. The objective of this study is to gauge the knowledge level of ODR and identify dissatisfaction among Malaysian and hence propose an independent ODR system. A mixed method approach of literature analysis of human computer interaction and software testing field, together with survey as data collection method is used. Results confirmed the lack of knowledge of ODR among Malaysians and based on the response when faced with a “dissatisfied experience” (pain storming approach), an Independent Evaluation ODR framework is proposed. The proposed framework could be used together with an ODR system, which is similar to an electronic court specifically catered to resolve e-commerce related disputes. In the future, the survey could be extended to a wider audience base and include wider coverage of various stages of the ODR process.

ODR and Justice System Integration: B.C.'s Civil Resolution Tribunal

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) services are e-justice service conduits that utilize Electronic Negotiation Systems (see the chapter by Kersten and Lai, this volume). They are a key mechanism that may provide a viable solution to the flood of e-disputes. Justice is important in negotiation processes (see the chapter by Albin and Druckman, this volume).It is therefore suggested that ODR services are a viable means to serve justice on the web.In this chapter we describe the state of e-justice and introduce the need for online dispute resolution services. We then present the concept of ODR, its different forms, and its association with Negotiation Support Systems. To this end we portray a classification of ODR services, give examples of different types of services, and specifically discuss one of the promising types, namely Principle-Based Dispute Resolution Services. The chapter concludes with an overview of the challenges associated with the introduction of ODR services, and specifically with their adoption by users; an issue that is echoed in several other chapters as well (see chapters by Etezadi, and Kersten and Lai, this volume)

How Online Negotiation Support Systems Empower People to Engage in Mediation – The Provision of Important Trade-off Advice Face-to-face negotiation is the preferred communication style for negotiation, as it is the richest form of communication (Daft & Lengel, 1986), allowing for words, gestures and body language to be clearly communicated. This form of communication also allows for instant feedback, essential in negotiation when it is imperative to check understanding of each other’s views and priorities. Bodtker and Jameson (2001) argue that experiencing emotion is one way we recognize conflict. Invariably, dispute resolution involves emotion, which if allowed to flood the substantive issues, otherwise known as emotional flooding, may result in disputants incapable of acting rationally (Jones & Bodtker, 2001), which may lead to unfair solutions. For example, in high-stress negotiations of family disputes, it may be difficult to think rationally about both the disputants and children’s future needs. This may lead to people having to live with a less-than-ideal financial situation that is not representative of their future needs. Online dispute resolution (ODR) systems involve the use of technology to aid (or in some instances to replace) human communication in the dispute resolution process. This means replacing a very rich form of communication with a lower form of media, with the lowest being text-based forms of communication. ODR using video-conferencing technology benefits disputants located in different areas, hence providing a good medium for those who geographically cannot meet in person. While also a fairly rich mode of communication, this type of technology is heavily dependent on infrastructure variables, such as Internet speed, application support and connectivity issues, which are not always available. In this article, we will introduce the concept of how ODR can support face-to-face negotiations by re-introducing our software AssetDivider as a method to support the face-to-face process in negotiation.

Advancement in technology brought many inevitable changes with more efficiency, making human life easier. Benefit of technology shall be incorporated for effective and efficient justice delivery in dispute resolution mechanism. New development in this area is online arbitration dispute resolutions (ODR) which have been without doubt adopted and practices by justice delivery system across the globe. But the question remains the same as whether justice delivery system is equipped to cope up in the same pace with the changes taking place in the society and technology. Are the existing laws being enough to conduct online system as an effective mechanism to settle disputes among the parties? Keeping in context the preceding query, the present research resorted tracing the laws relevant to the use of ODR mechanism in India and Indonesia, as their present legal framework of arbitration addressing dispute resolution through the ODR mechanism lack specific laws. The present research adopts a mixed method using both primary and secondary data for tracing and comparison the ODR system in India and Indonesia. It is concluded that ODR deliverance are valid and enforceable in the present legal framework of both the countries. Therefore, people must not be doubtful while using ODR mechanism to settle their disputes. It also demonstrates that an ample scope is there in the existing laws of both the countries to accommodate and enhance the overall process and deliverance of ODR mechanism through amendments and separate guidelines.