many developers nowadays refer to their applications as legal technology. In any
case, ODR can be seen as a pioneer of dispute resolution technology, having its
roots in web applications as early as the 1990s.
5
Originally ODR was developed as a mechanism for providing some form of
redress for online disputes that would otherwise be left outside the courts owing
to the low value of the claim or the jurisdictional challenges of cross-border
litigation. Typically used in cases concerning e-commerce or other low intensity
disputes,
6 ODR processes are often partly or completely automated. Although
there is no uniform definition, ODR is seen as private dispute resolution based on
the consent of the parties, similarly to alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
7
Because of this close relation to ADR and its criticism of the existing courtroom
practices, ODR is often examined as part of ADR doctrine. ODR can be
provided by several different intermediaries, such as e-commerce platforms,
private ODR providers, credit card companies, or private actors performing
public functions, as is the case with ICANN.
8
It follows from ODR’s nature as private dispute resolution that its development has not been burdened by slow legislative, unlike innovations of courtroom
technology; neither is ODR bound by due process criteria like the courts, which
raises questions about the quality of such services. The role of digital technologies in ODR is often more pronounced than in courtroom technology, especially
in completely automated procedures.
However, regulatory efforts are slowly coming to grips with ODR, in a bid to
assure due process. In the EU, the ODR Regulation and ADR Directive
established a union-wide ODR platform through which individual disputes are
directed to the applicable national ADR entities.
9 The EU’s framework is focused
on non-binding ODR.
10 Also, the United Nations Commission on International
Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has attempted to draft uniform procedural rules for
both binding and non-binding ODR. However, the work was terminated in
2016 having produced technical notes on ODR.
11
Interestingly, ODR has never actually lived up to the expectations regarding its
popularity.
12 A single triumph has been named and referenced over and over
again, namely eBay, which solves 60 million e-commerce cases per year through
its Resolution Center.
13 In the face of increasing difficulties,
14 many ODR
providers have turned towards the public sector in the hope of investment. It
still remains to be seen how the legislative work of the EU will affect the dispute
resolution environment. Nonetheless, despite disappointments and new promises,
the emergence of ODR has signified an important chapter in development of
dispute resolution technology.
Legal technology
Around 2015 the term ‘legal technology’ became the household name for
different applications of dispute resolution technology. Originally this new term
referred to software developed for law firms, such as e-billing systems, case flow
analysis tools and client portals. Recently the definition has become more
Introduction 7
case, ODR can be seen as a pioneer of dispute resolution technology, having its
roots in web applications as early as the 1990s.
5
Originally ODR was developed as a mechanism for providing some form of
redress for online disputes that would otherwise be left outside the courts owing
to the low value of the claim or the jurisdictional challenges of cross-border
litigation. Typically used in cases concerning e-commerce or other low intensity
disputes,
6 ODR processes are often partly or completely automated. Although
there is no uniform definition, ODR is seen as private dispute resolution based on
the consent of the parties, similarly to alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
7
Because of this close relation to ADR and its criticism of the existing courtroom
practices, ODR is often examined as part of ADR doctrine. ODR can be
provided by several different intermediaries, such as e-commerce platforms,
private ODR providers, credit card companies, or private actors performing
public functions, as is the case with ICANN.
8
It follows from ODR’s nature as private dispute resolution that its development has not been burdened by slow legislative, unlike innovations of courtroom
technology; neither is ODR bound by due process criteria like the courts, which
raises questions about the quality of such services. The role of digital technologies in ODR is often more pronounced than in courtroom technology, especially
in completely automated procedures.
However, regulatory efforts are slowly coming to grips with ODR, in a bid to
assure due process. In the EU, the ODR Regulation and ADR Directive
established a union-wide ODR platform through which individual disputes are
directed to the applicable national ADR entities.
9 The EU’s framework is focused
on non-binding ODR.
10 Also, the United Nations Commission on International
Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has attempted to draft uniform procedural rules for
both binding and non-binding ODR. However, the work was terminated in
2016 having produced technical notes on ODR.
11
Interestingly, ODR has never actually lived up to the expectations regarding its
popularity.
12 A single triumph has been named and referenced over and over
again, namely eBay, which solves 60 million e-commerce cases per year through
its Resolution Center.
13 In the face of increasing difficulties,
14 many ODR
providers have turned towards the public sector in the hope of investment. It
still remains to be seen how the legislative work of the EU will affect the dispute
resolution environment. Nonetheless, despite disappointments and new promises,
the emergence of ODR has signified an important chapter in development of
dispute resolution technology.
Legal technology
Around 2015 the term ‘legal technology’ became the household name for
different applications of dispute resolution technology. Originally this new term
referred to software developed for law firms, such as e-billing systems, case flow
analysis tools and client portals. Recently the definition has become more
Introduction 7