References
- 1Amazon Pay A-to-Z Guarantee for Customers: <
https://pay.amazon.com/help/201751470 > accessed 15 November 2024. - 2Ballesteros T., ‘International Perspectives on Online Dispute Resolution in the E-Commerce Landscape’, (2021) 8 International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution 2, 85–101. DOI: 10.5553/IJODR/235250022021008002002
- 3Biallaß I.D.,
‘Gerichts-Chatbots und Formulare’ in Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 215–234. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-011 - 4Brügmann C.,
‘Zugang zum Recht’ in Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds.), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 11–32. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-002 - 5Buchwald M., ‘Smart Contract Dispute Resolution: The Inescapable Flaws of Blockchain-Based Arbitration’ (2020) 168 University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1369–1423.
- 6Cappelleti M. (gen. ed.), Access to Justice, (Sithoff Giuffrè 1978–1979).
- 7Ciborra C. U. and Lanzara G. F.,
‘Designing Dynamic Artifacts: Computer Systems as Formative Contexts’ in Galiardi P. (ed), Symbols and Artifacts (De Gruyter 1990). DOI: 10.1515/9783110874143.147 - 8Commission Recommendation of 4 April 2001 on the principles for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes, C(2001) 1016) [2001] OJ L 109, 56–61.
- 9Contini F., Onţanu E. A. and Velicogna M., ‘AI Accountability in Judicial Proceedings: An Actor–Network Approach’, (2024) 13 Laws,
71 . DOI: 10.3390/laws13060071 - 10Contini F., ‘Unboxing Generative AI for the Legal Professions: Functions, Impacts and Governance’ (2024) 15 International Journal for Court Administration 2,
1 . DOI: 10.36745/ijca.604 - 11Contini F. and Velicogna M., ‘The Dispersion of Dispute Resolution Fora in EU (or) From court delay to escape from justice: The collapse of civil justice in Italy’, Shifting Boundaries Between Dispute Resolution Systems: Re-Assessing the Geography of Justice, Expert Workshop, Tilburg, 17–18 September 2024.
- 12Cortes P., ‘Online Dispute Resolution Services: A Selected Number of Case Studies’, (2014) 20 Computer and Telecommunications Law Review 6, 172–178.
- 13Cortés P.,
Online Dispute Resolution for consumers in the European Union (Routledge 2010). DOI: 10.4324/9780203847756 - 14Cortes P., ‘Using Technology and ADR Methods to Enhance Access to Justice’(2018) 5 International Journal on Online Dispute Resolution 1–2,
103 . DOI: 10.5553/IJODR/235250022018005102011 - 15Creutzfeldt N.,
Ombudsmen and ADR. A comparative study of informal justice in Europe (Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies 2018). DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-78807-4 - 16Dal Pubel L., ‘e-Bay dispute resolution and revolution: an investigation on a successful ODR model’, (2018) Platform Economy & Labour Market, 130–155. DOI: 10.5771/9783748900351-255
- 17Daniels C.,
‘Alternative Dispute Resolution for European consumers: A question of access to and standards of justice’ in Cadiet L., Hess B. and Requejo Isidro M. (eds.), Privatizing Dispute Resolution. Trends and Limits (Nomos, 2019). - 18de Souza S.P. and Spohr M.,
Technology, Innovation and Access to Justice: Dialogues on the Future of Law (Edinburgh University Press 2021). DOI: 10.1515/9781474473880 - 19DGSIA, Ministero della Giustizia, Ricognizione della Digitalizzazione del Processo Civile e Penale e della Transizione Digitale del Ministero della Giustizia, February 2021.
- 20Dickens C.,
Bleak House (Bradbury & Evans 1853). - 21DiMatteo L. A., Janssen A., Ortolani P., De Elizalde F., Cannarsa M. and Durovic M. (red.), The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press 2021). DOI: 10.1017/9781108936040
- 22Dörr S.,
‘Der digitale Zugang zur Justiz – Rechtsantragstelle und Justizportal’ in Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 235–61. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-012 - 23Durovic M. and Lech F. M.,
‘Legal Tech in ADR’ , in DiMatteo et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press 2021). DOI: 10.1017/9781108936040.009 - 24Dworkin R.,
Taking Rights Seriously (Harvard University Press 1976). - 25ECHR, Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Right to a Fair Trial (civil limb), updated 29 February 2024 <
https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/guide_art_6_civil_eng > accessed 15 November 2024. - 26Eidenmüller H. and Engel M., ‘Against False Settlement: Designing Efficient Consumer Rights Enforcement Systems in Europe’ (2014) 29 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 2, 261–298.
- 27Eidenmüller H. and Wagner G.,
Law by Algorithm (Mohr Siebeck 2021), 223–260. DOI: 10.1628/978-3-16-157509-9 - 28European Ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment (2018), adopted by the Council of Europe <
https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-european-ethical-charter-on-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-ai-in-judicial-systems-and-their-environment > accessed 15 November 2024. - 29Freeman Engstrom D. (ed.),
Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice (Cambridge University Press 2023). DOI: 10.1017/9781009255301 - 30Garth B. and Cappelletti M., ‘Access to justice: the newest wave in the worldwide movement to make rights effective’ (1978) 27 Buff L Rev 181, 225–227.
- 31Gélinas F.,
‘The Management of Procedural Expectations in Consumer and Small Claims ODR’ in Barral Viñals I., La Resolución de Conflictos con Consumidores: De la Mediación a las ODR (REUS Editorial 2018). - 32Guadamuz V. A., ‘Ebay Law: The Legal Implications of the C2c Electronic Commerce Model’, (2003) 19 Computer Law & Security Review 6, 468–73. DOI: 10.1016/S0267-3649(03)00604-6
- 33Günther P. and Wrase M.,
‘Digitale Rechtsmobilisierung – Die Rolle von Legal Tech-Angeboten beim Zugang zum Recht’ , Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 734–52. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-030 - 34Hörnle J.,
Cross-Border Internet Dispute Resolution (Cambridge University Press 2009). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511576102 - 35Kamphorst A.,
Applying the right to a fair trial to alternative consumer dispute resolution , diss. Groningen 2023. - 36Katsh E. and Rabinovich-Einy O.,
Digital Justice . Technology and the Internet of Disputes (Oxford University Press 2017). DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190464585.001.0001 - 37Lanzara G.F.,
Shifting Practices. Reflections on Technology, Practice, and Innovation (The MIT Press 2016). DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/10642.001.0001 - 38Lanzara G.F., ‘Between Transient Constructs and Persistent Structures: Designing Systems in Action’ (1999) 8 Journal of Strategic Information Systems. DOI: 10.1016/S0963-8687(00)00031-7
- 39Laukemann B., ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution and Artificial Intelligence’, in Hess B., Woo M., Cadiet L., Menétrey S., and Vallines García E. (eds), Comparative Procedural Law and Justice (Part IX Chapter 5) <
https://www.cplj.org/publications/9-5-alternative-dispute-resolution-and-artificial-intelligence >. - 40Liebig R.,
Außergerichtliche private Streitbeileging durch digitale Platformen (Nomos 2024). DOI: 10.5771/9783748943372 - 41Koulu R.,
Dispute Resolution and Technology: Revisiting the Justification of Conflict Management (University of Helsinki Conflict Management Institute 2016). DOI: 10.31885/9789515182661 - 42Koulu R.,
‘Improving Consumer Protection through Technology: The Challenge of Compliance’ in Barral Viñals I., La Resolución de Conflictos con Consumidores: De la Mediación a las ODR (REUS Editorial 2018). - 43Koulu R.,
Law, Technology and Dispute Resolution, The Privatisation of Coercion (Routledge 2019). DOI: 10.4324/9781315149479 - 44Magesh V. et al, ‘Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools’, arXiv:2405.20362 [cs.CL] (2024). DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.20362
- 45Maroz R., Popova O. and Satizábal Acosta S.,
‘Digitizing Court Systems: Benefits and Limitations’ , Global Indicators Briefs, No. 25, World Bank Group 2023. DOI: 10.1596/40951 - 46Menkel-Meadow C., ‘When Litigation Is Not the Only Way: Consensus Building and Mediation as Public Interest Lawyering’, Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works,
171 . - 47Mentovich A., Prescott J.J., and Rabinovich-Einy O., ‘Legitimacy and Online Proceedings: Procedural Justice, Access to Justice, and the Role of Income’, (2023) 57 L. & Soc’y Rev. 189–209. DOI: 10.1111/lasr.12653
- 48Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws, book XIV: Of Laws in Relation to the Nature of the Climate and Book XVIII: Of Laws in the Relation They Bear to the Nature of the Soil.
- 49Mueller M., ‘Rough justice: A Statistical assessment of ICANN’s Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy’, (2021) 17 The Information Society 3, 151–163. DOI: 10.1080/01972240152493029
- 50Nylund A. and Cabral A.,
Shaping Civil Litigation Using Procedural Agreements (Eleven Publishing 2024). - 51Onțanu E.A.,
‘Court and Out-of-Court Procedures: In Search of a Comprehensive Framework for Consumers’ Access to Justice in Cross-Border Litigation’ in Cadiet L., Hess B. and Requejo Isidro M. (eds.), Privatizing Dispute Resolution. Trends and Limits (Nomos, 2019). DOI: 10.5771/9783748900351-47 - 52Onțanu E.A.,
Cross-Border Debt Recovery in the EU. A Comparative and Empirical Study into the Application of the European Order for Payment and the European Small Claims Procedure (Intersentia 2017). - 53Ortolani P.,
‘Digital Dispute Resolution: Blurring the Boundaries of ADR’ , in DiMatteo et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press 2021). DOI: 10.1017/9781108936040.011 - 54Palombo A., Battaglini R., and Cantisani L.,
‘A Blockchain-Based Smart Dispute Resolution Method’ , in DiMatteo et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press 2021). DOI: 10.1017/9781108936040.010 - 55Paschke A.,
‘Öffentlichkeitsgebot und digitaler Zivilprozess’ in Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 664–81. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-027 - 56Portuguese Justice Practial Guide (Beta Version) <
https://justica.gov.pt/en-gb/Servicos/Justice-Practical-Guide-Beta-Version > accessed 15 November 2024. - 57Prescott J.J., ‘Using ODR Platforms to Level the Playing Field: Improving Pro Se Litigation through ODR Design’ in Engstrom (ed.), Legal Tech (n 42). 286–304. DOI: 10.1017/9781009255301.016
- 58Quintanilla V.D. et al.,
‘Digital Inequalities and Access to Justice: Dialing into Zoom Court Unrepresented’ , in Engstrom D.F. (ed.), Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice (Cambridge University Press 2023), 225–50. DOI: 10.1017/9781009255301.014 - 59Rabinovich-Einy O., ‘Process Pluralism in the Post-COVID Dispute Resolution Landscape’ (2022) 10 Texas A&M Law Review 1, 55–73. DOI: 10.37419/LR.V10.I1.4
- 60Rabinovich-Einy O., ‘The Past, Present, and Future of Online Dispute Resolution’, (2021) 74 Current Legal Problems 1. DOI: 10.1093/clp/cuab004
- 61Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds),
Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter: Berlin 2023). - 62Rühl G. and Horn J.,
‘§ 26 Verfahrensgrundsätze und Digitalisierung der zivilgerichtlichen Streitbeilegung’ in Riehm T. and Dörr S. (eds), Digitalisierung und Zivilverfahren (De Gruyter 2023), 627–63. DOI: 10.1515/9783110755787-026 - 63Sandefur R.L., ‘Access to What?’, (2019) 148 Daedalus 1, 49–55. DOI: 10.1162/daed_a_00534
- 64Sandefur R.L., ‘Legal advice from Nonlawyers: Consumer Demand, Provider Quality, and Public Harms’ (2020) 16 Stan. J. C.R. & C.L.
283 . - 65Santos Abrantes Geraldes A.,
‘A Judge’s Perspective: Guarantees of a Fair Trial and Online Dispute Resolution’ in Moura Vicente D., Dias Oliveira E. and Gomes de Almeida J. (eds.), Online Dispute Resolution. New Challenges (Nomos 2022). DOI: 10.5771/9783748931508-21 - 66Schmitz A.J. and Rule C., ‘The New Handshake: Where We Are Now’ (2016) 3 International Journal on Online Dispute Resolution 2,
9 . DOI: 10.5553/IJODR/235250022016003002002 - 67Sourdin T.,
Judges, Technology and Artificial Intelligence (Edward Elgar 2021). DOI: 10.4337/9781788978262.00005 - 68Sourdin T., Li B. and Burke T., ‘Just, Quick and Cheap? Civil Dispute Resolution and Technology’ (2019) 19 Macquarie Law Journal
17 . - 69Spaulding N.W., ‘Online Dispute Resolution and the End of Adversarial Justice?’, in Engstrom (ed.), Legal Tech (n 42), 251–285. DOI: 10.1017/9781009255301.015
- 70Susskind R.,
Online courts and the future of justice (Oxford University Press 2019). DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198838364.001.0001 - 71Susskind R.,
The future of law (Oxford University Press 1996). - 72Tjong Tjin Tai E.,
‘The Two Faces of Legal Tech in B2C Relations’ , in DiMatteo et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press 2021). - 73Tjong Tjin Tai E. and Frenken P., ‘Procedurele rechtvaardigheid bij platformprocedures’, (2023) Tijdschrift Civiele Rechtspleging 3, 56–66. DOI: 10.5553/TCR/092986492023031003002
- 74Tyler T.R., ‘Citizen discontent with legal procedures: a social science perspective on civil procedure reform’, (1997) 45 American Journal of Comparative Law 4, 871–904. DOI: 10.2307/841024
- 75van Dijk F., ‘The Decline in Commercial Court Cases in The Netherlands’, Shifting Boundaries Between Dispute Resolution Systems: Re-Assessing the Geography of Justice, Expert Workshop, Tilburg, 17–18 September 2024.
- 76van Gelder E.,
Consumer Online Dispute Resolution Pathways in Europe (Boom juridische uitgevers 2022), 196–214 - 77van Zelst B., Shifting Boundaries Between Dispute Resolution Systems: Re-Assessing the Geography of Justice, Expert Workshop, Tilburg, 17–18 September 2024.
- 78Velicogna M.,
‘A Time for Justice? Reflecting on the Many Facets of Time and Temporality in Justice Service Provision’ , in de Vaujany F.-X., Holt R. and Grandazzi A.(eds.), Organizations as Time. Technology, Power and Politics (Cambridge University Press 2023). DOI: 10.1017/9781009297288.017 - 79Velicogna M., ‘Cross-border dispute resolution in Europe: looking for a new “normal”’ (2022) Oñati Socio-Legal Series
123 . DOI: 10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1303 - 80Vennmans T.J.,
Access to justice in times of technological acceleration (Wolters Kluwer 2024). - 81Warwas B.,
‘Access to Privatized Consumer Justice: Arbitration, ADR, and the Future of Value-Oriented Justice in the EU’ , in Cadiet L., Hess B. and Requejo Isidro M. (eds.), Privatizing Dispute Resolution. Trends and Limits (Nomos, 2019). DOI: 10.5771/9783748900351-325 - 82Woo M. and van Rhee C.H. (eds.), Comparative Civil Procedure (Edward Elgar 2025). DOI: 10.4337/9781786434418