Search result: 1300 articles

x
Article

Truly Exceptional? Participants in the Belgian 2019 Youth for Climate Protest Wave

Journal Politics of the Low Countries, Issue Online First 2022
Keywords protest, participation, inequality, climate change, Fridays For Future
Authors Ruud Wouters, Michiel De Vydt and Luna Staes
AbstractAuthor's information

    In 2019, the world witnessed an exceptional wave of climate protests. In this case study, we scrutinise who participated in the protests staged in Belgium. We ask: did the exceptional mobilising context of the 2019 protest wave also bring exceptional protesters to the streets? Were thanks to the unique momentum standard barriers to protest participation overcome? We answer these questions by comparing three surveys of participants in the 2019 protest wave with three surveys of relevant reference publics. Our findings show that while the Belgian 2019 protest was in many ways exceptional, its participants were less so. Although participants – especially in the early phase of the protest wave – were less protest experienced, younger and unaffiliated to organisations, our findings simultaneously confirm the persistence of a great many well-known socio-demographic and political inequalities. Our conclusion centres on the implications of these findings.


Ruud Wouters
Ruud Wouters, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Antwerp. He studies protest participation and the impact of protest on media, public opinion and politics.

Michiel De Vydt
Michiel De Vydt is a PhD student at the University of Antwerp. He studies the micro-level predictors and outcomes of interpersonal protest recruitment.

Luna Staes
Luna Staes is a PhD student at the University of Antwerp. She studies how protest affects public opinion in the hybrid media environment. All authors are members of research group Media, Movements & Politics (M²P) at the political science department of the University of Antwerp.

    The French Supreme Court has held that an employer was not guilty of direct discrimination on the ground of religious beliefs by imposing on an employee of Hindu faith a disciplinary transfer to a new working site, when such transfer was justified by an essential and determining professional requirement.


Claire Toumieux
Claire Toumieux is partner at Allen & Overy, Paris.

Susan Ekrami
Susan Ekrami is counsel at Allen & Overy, Paris.

    The French Supreme Court has held that exceeding the maximum weekly working time causes automatic harm to the employee which should be repaired.


Claire Toumieux
Claire Toumieux is partner at Allen & Overy, Paris.

Susan Ekrami
Susan Ekrami is counsel at Allen & Overy, Paris.
Pending Cases

Cases C-190/22, Fixed-Term Work

BL – v – Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, reference lodged by the Ufficio del Giudice di pace di Rimini (Italy) on 7 March 2022

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2022
Keywords Fixed-Term Work
Article

Access_open Mapping the Parameters of Online Dispute Resolution

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords ODR, ethics, online dispute resolution, alternative dispute resolution, technology, artificial intelligence
Authors Leah Wing
AbstractAuthor's information

    The definition of online dispute resolution (ODR) has become increasingly contested, particularly fueled by the recent explosion in the use of technology during the pandemic by courts and alternative dispute resolution practitioners. The recent expansion of stakeholders has contributed productively to the on-going discussion of the parameters of ODR that have implications for ethical practice. Does the use of video conferencing constitute ODR? What new procedural and substantive justice concerns arise with the use of technology in dispute handling and how should they be addressed? Since technology not only alters the role of third parties and disputants but also serves as a fourth party, what are the ethical implications for example, of employing artificial intelligence? How can explorations of the boundaries of ODR foster a re-imaging of 21st Century justice systems?
    This article explores the importance of the parameters of ODR for the ethical practice of dispute resolution and introduces a paper, Framing the Parameters of Online Dispute Resolution (National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution, 2022) that offers a descriptive ODR Framework; one that encompasses the broad range of views on the boundaries of ODR along an axis of increasing reliance on technology through various functions and stages of dispute handling. The article discusses the implications of this ODR Framework for enhancing ethical guidance and regulation for whatever definition of ODR is utilized.


Leah Wing
Leah Wing is Director, National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution; Co-Founder and President-elect, Board of Directors, International Council for Online Dispute Resolution; and Senior Lecturer II, Legal Studies Program, Department of Political Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (USA).
Article

Lessons from India’s ODR Movement

Insights from Co-leading a Movement While Surviving a Pandemic between 2018 and 2021

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords Online Dispute Resolution, startups, entrepreneurs, ICICI Bank, E-ADR challenge, NITI Aayog, Supreme Court of India, ODR Handbook 2021, ODR national policy report
Authors Chittu Nagarajan and Sachin Malhan
AbstractAuthor's information

    India’s vast case pendency and inefficiency of formal mechanisms greatly hinder the resolution of disputes. Aimed at moving India beyond these traditional limitations, the online dispute resolution (ODR) movement in India developed and gained tremendous momentum with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholders otherwise resistant to change, both in government and in industry, were compelled to embrace technology and resort to an online mode of resolving disputes. This article traces the steady and promising growth of ODR in India and examines the contributions of innovators, entrepreneurs and enterprises who recognized the need for an alternative model of dispute resolution and participated in championing the expansion of ODR in the country. The article identifies insights from the Indian experience that could be portable to other missions for law and justice innovation in the world.


Chittu Nagarajan
Chittu Nagarajan is widely recognized as a global pioneer in ODR, Fellow of the National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution, Founding Board Member of the International Council for Online Dispute Resolution. Chittu is the founder of CREK ODR and co-founded Modria.com, one of the first global ODR platforms of repute, ODRworld and ODRindia, the first online dispute resolution service provider in India in 2004. She also served as Head of the eBay and PayPal Community Court initiative. She can be reached at chittu@crekodr.com.

Sachin Malhan
Sachin Malhan is the co-founder of Agami, established in 2018 with the objective of accelerating innovation in law and justice. It has pursued its mandate with a focus on discovering new ideas, curating and connecting critical actors across silos, and telling the story of a different future for law and justice. Agami began its ODR initiative in late 2018 and continues to advance ODR across different business ecosystems and strata of society. Sachin can be reached at sachin@agami.in.
Article

Europe’s Coordinated Approach to ODR

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), AI, lawtech, justice systems, human rights, Council of Europe, access to justice, European Cyberjustice Network, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice
Authors Graham Ross
AbstractAuthor's information

    While court administrations/justice departments were not among the early adopters of online dispute resolution (ODR) they can clearly, as gatekeepers to the majority of civil disputes, have an enormous influence on ODR and, in particular, the speed at which ODR is adopted as a widely accepted practice in dispute resolution.
    Systems being rolled out by or for courts have been piecemeal as individual administrations pursue research into their own future. Early systems tend to be in either case management and/or e-filing but little in the way of e-negotiation or aids to resolution. What is shared is the existing challenges to the courts from rising costs, process delay and growth in the numbers of citizens unable, owing to cost, to pursue or defend litigation.
    In Europe what is bringing court administrations together in their development of ODR has been the issue of human rights and access to justice, which explains why an overall influence in the sharing of knowledge and experience in ODR has been the Council of Europe. This was a body set up in the immediate aftermath of World War II with a view to encouraging European states to work together in advancing and protecting human rights. Its greatest creation has been the European Convention on Human Rights and, of particular relevance, Article 6, which secures the right to a “public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law”.
    This article tracks various developments from bodies within the structure of the Council of Europe with regard to the application of ODR to the judicial system. These developments extend from research and debate on whether the overall impact on human rights and, in particular, access to justice, of ODR could be seen as a threat, and thus something to be protected against, or in a more positive light and, therefore, to be encouraged. This article tracks the formation of various bodies within the Council of Europe, such as the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice , The Working Group on Cyberjustice and Artificial Intelligence and, most recently, the European Cyberjustice Network. This article also notes outcomes such as the Report on the impact of ODR on Human Rights produced by the Committee of Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe and the European Ethical Guidelines on the use of AI in judicial systems produced by The Working Group on Cyberjustice and Artificial Intelligence of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice.


Graham Ross
Graham Ross is a UK lawyer and mediator with over 20 years of experience in IT and the law. Graham is the author of lthe original QUILL egal application software (accounts and time recording) and the founder of LAWTEL, the popular webbased legal information update service. Graham co-founded the first ODR service in the UK, WeCanSettle, designing the blind bidding software at the heart of the system. Graham subsequently founded TheMediationRoom.com, for whom he designed their online mediation platform. Graham speaks regularly at international conferences on the application of technology to ADR. Graham was host of the 5th International Conference on Online Dispute Resolution held in Liverpool, UK, in 2007 and has organised two other ODR conferences. Graham was a member of the EMCOD project which created a tool for the European Union for the measurement of justice through ODR. Graham was a member of the UK Civil Justice Council’s Advisory Group on Online Dispute Resolution, whose recommendations led to the creation of an online court for small claims. Graham is a Board Member of ICODR. Graham is also a leading trainer in ODR having created the accredited distance training course at www.ODRtraining.com.
Article

ODR Readiness of Portuguese-Speaking Countries

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords PALOP, ODR, ICT, Portuguese-speaking, dispute resolution
Authors Ana Maria Maia Gonçalves, Andrea Maia, Nuno Albuquerque e.a.
AbstractAuthor's information

    In this article, we investigate whether the conditions for the emergence of an online dispute resolution (ODR) market in Portuguese-speaking countries have been met. The size of the Portuguese-speaking population and the internet penetration in Portuguese-speaking countries may look promising, but what is called networked readiness as well as the legal context needs to be factored in before any conclusion may be drawn.


Ana Maria Maia Gonçalves
Ana Maria Maia Gonçalves, Instituto de Formação e Certificação de Mediadores Lusófonos (ICFML)

Andrea Maia
Andrea Maia, Instituto de Formação e Certificação de Mediadores Lusófonos (ICFML)

Nuno Albuquerque
Nuno Albuquerque, Instituto de Formação e Certificação de Mediadores Lusófonos (ICFML)

François Bogacz
François Bogacz, Instituto de Formação e Certificação de Mediadores Lusófonos (ICFML). Correspondence should be addressed to ana@icfml.org and fb@icfml.org.
Article

The Brazilian Law System and Some Reflections on the Use of Technology

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords Brazilian, ODR, democracy, citizenship, judicial system, digital inclusion
Authors Beatriz Arruda and Renata Porto Adri
AbstractAuthor's information

    This contribution has emerged in response to the provocations of the editor, Daniel Rainey, about the interest in knowing the status and use of technology by the Brazilian judicial system. It is based on the premise that the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of technological tools, even in complex legal systems such as that in Brazil. There is still much to be built on it, and there are many opportunities for adopting online solutions as a means of accessing justice.


Beatriz Arruda
Beatrice Gabriel Arruda, specialist in Corporate Social Responsibility at PUC/MG, Certified Mediator ICFML-IMI, Platform Operations and Training Manager MOL – Online Mediation.

Renata Porto Adri
Renata Porto Adri, Master and PhD in State Law from PUC/SP, Legal Analyst of the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, Mediator graduated by ESMP-SP and Certified Advanced by ICFML-IMI, Postgraduate in Mediation, Negotiation and Conflict Resolutions by UCP-Porto.
Article

Transformacion digital de la mediacion

Praxis en Hispanoamerica

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords online dispute resolutions, transformación digital, Hispanoamérica, pandemia
Authors Alberto Elisavetsky and Maria Victoria Marun
AbstractAuthor's information

    El uso de la Tecnología aplicada a los métodos de resolución de conflictos, que desde hace varios años viene abriéndose camino con la presencia de las ODR (On line Dispute Resolution), han experimentado en el año 2020, a raíz del confinamiento obligatorio impuesto en muchos países como consecuencia de la Pandemia por covid 19, una proliferación asombrosa, constituyéndose en casi la alternativa válida de acceso a la justicia a nivel mundial. Por ello, nos proponemos abordar en este trabajo la transformación Digital que se ha ido desarrollando sobre las ODR, en los diferentes países de Hispanoamérica, y cómo la situación de Pandemia aceleró ese proceso de transformación.


Alberto Elisavetsky
Alberto Elisavetsky, Contador Público-Mediador; Experto en Educación a Distancia; Fundador y Presidente de Odr América Latina; Director del Observatorio de Conflictos y del Posgrado en Cibermediación en la Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero Argentina; Becaria del Centro de Tecnología y Conflicto de la Universidad de Massachusetts Estados Unidos; Miembro de la Junta de ICOD; Presidente de la Comisión de Negociación y Mediación del Consejo Profesional de Economía Ciencias de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Profesor de Introducción a la Resolución de Conflictos, Negociación, Diseño de Sistemas de Resolución de Conflictos y Resolución de Disputas en Línea de diversas universidades y tribunales de América y Europa; Creador del Registro Global de Ciber-Mediadores; Creador de la Plataforma de simulación de mediaciones a distancia “Simediar”; redactor de lo digital Revista en Español Online Dispute Resolution Latin America Journal; Redactor en español de la revista digital mediate.com; Creador del Consejo Latinoamericano para la Resolución de Conflictos en Línea. Miembro del Comité Asesor de Ex Curia International India; Creador de Odr Argentina, Perú, Brasil, México y España; Director del libro "La mediación a la luz de las nuevas tecnologías" Editorial Erreius; Embajador de la Paz Fundación Mil Milenios de Paz Pea Unesco;Miembro de la junta directiva de ICODR y presidente del comité de educación.

Maria Victoria Marun
Maria Victoria Marun, Abogada Mediadora. Profesora Superior en Ciencias Jurídicas. Especialista en Docencia Universitaria. Directora del Centro de Resolución de Conflictos del Colegio de Abogados y Procuradores de la 3° Circ. Judicial de Mendoza. Argentina. Docente Universitaria.. Posgraduada en Derecho Privado. Capacitadora en Legislación Escolar y Resolución de Conflictos en Instituciones Educativas. Docente universitaria. Miembro fundador de la Academia ODR Latinoamérica. Miembro del Foro Internacional de Mediadores Profesionales.- Miembro del Comité de Gestión de Cyberweek 2013 a 2016 y de E-MARC (Congreso Internacional de Resolución de conflictos a Distancia).. Contribuyente académico y disertante en varios eventos científicos nacionales e internacionales. Autora de varias producciones Académicas y publicaciones en temas Resolución de conflictos.
Article

ODR and Online Courts in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Is It Correct to Affirm That Courts Are a Mere Service?

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 1 2022
Keywords procedural law, dispute resolution, online dispute resolution, online courts, jurisdiction, online court hearings
Authors Dierle Nunes and Hugo Malone
AbstractAuthor's information

    Starting from the premise that the pandemic caused by the new coronavirus forced the growth of dispute resolution technologies in Brazil and around the world, this article presents a critique of one of the central arguments for the deployment of online dispute resolution techniques in the courts: that courts are a mere service. It proposes, therefore, the thesis that the term courts, as a synonym of the jurisdictional function, can be understood neither as a public service nor as a mere place but rather as a condition of possibility for fundamental rights, be it in physical or digital environments. In order to guarantee that the execution of procedural acts in digital environments conforms to the democratic constitutional procedure, this article proposes to create a seal of recognition to be granted by the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) to the platforms that operate according to the due constitutional process. It is also suggested that minimal guidelines be formulated that are capable of offering a reference for the discussions, development, use and integration of online conflict resolution platforms, as well as that institutional protocols be adopted as a means of democratizing the application of technology in law.


Dierle Nunes
Dierle Nunes, PhD in Procedural Law from Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas) / Universitá degli Studi di Roma ‘La Sapienza’. Tenure Professor at PUC Minas PPGD (Law Graduate Program) and collaborator at UFMG. Member of the Commission of Jurists that advised on the 2015 Brazilian Civil Procedure Code at the Chamber of Deputies. Lawyer. dierle@cron.adv.br.

Hugo Malone
Hugo Malone, PhD. Student. Master in Procedural Law from Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas). Researcher in the research group ‘Processualismo Constitucional democrático e reformas processuais’ (Democratic Constitutional Proceduralism and Procedural Reforms). Legal Adviser at the Law Court of Minas Gerais. hugomalone@yahoo.com.br. This article results from the research group ‘Processualismo Constitucional democrático e reformas processuais’ (‘Democratic Constitutional Processualism and Procedural Reforms’), linked to Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais and to Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais and registered at CNPQ’s National Directory of Research Groups http://dgp.cnpq.br/dgp/espelhogrupo/3844899706730420. The group is a founding member of ‘ProcNet – International Research Network on Civil Justice and Contemporary Procedure’ (http://laprocon.ufes.br/grupos-de-pesquisa-integrantes-da-rede). This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001.
Case Law

2022/1 EELC’s review of the year 2021

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2022
Authors Niklas Bruun, Filip Dorssemont, Zef Even e.a.
Abstract

    Various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year.


Niklas Bruun

Filip Dorssemont

Zef Even

Ruben Houweling

Marianne Hrdlicka

Anthony Kerr

Attila Kun

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Daiva Petrylaitė

Luca Ratti

Jan-Pieter Vos
Article

Restorative justice training for judges and public prosecutors in the European Union: what is on offer and where are the gaps?

Journal The International Journal of Restorative Justice, Issue Online First 2022
Keywords restorative justice, judicial training, judges, public prosecutors
Authors Ana Catarina Pereira, Britt De Craen and Ivo Aertsen
AbstractAuthor's information

    Judges and public prosecutors across Europe continue to be the main source of referral of cases to restorative justice programmes organised in the context of the criminal justice system. As a result, the training of these two groups of legal professionals regarding what restorative justice is and what it can offer to victims, offenders and the community has for many years been identified as a priority for the development of restorative justice in the European Union (EU). However, little information is available about what actually exists in terms of judicial training on restorative justice within the national judicial training institutions responsible for the initial and/or continuous training of judges and/or public prosecutors. Therefore, we developed an online survey on judicial training on restorative justice and invited 38 judicial training institutions operating in the (then) 28 EU Member States to participate in our study. We were able to make relevant observations regarding the reasons for the non-existence of restorative justice training in most of the judicial training institutions studied and identify important elements of the architecture of the restorative justice training offered by the judicial training institution of Czech Republic.


Ana Catarina Pereira
Ana Pereira is a PhD researcher in Criminology at the Leuven Institute of Criminology at KU Leuven, Belgium. She received a PhD grant from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, FCT).

Britt De Craen
Britt De Craen is a master’s student in Criminology at the Leuven Institute of Criminology at KU Leuven, Belgium.

Ivo Aertsen
Ivo Aertsen is Professor Emeritus of the Leuven Institute of Criminology at KU Leuven, Belgium. Corresponding author: Ana Pereira, anacatarina.alvespereira@kuleuven.be.

    Restorative justice has frequently been presented as a new criminal justice paradigm, and as something that is radically different from punishment. I will argue that this ‘oppositioning’ is problematic for two reasons: first, because some cases of restorative justice constitute de facto punishment from the perspectives of some positions on what punishment is; second, because restorative justice could reasonably be more widely adopted as a new form of de jure punishment, which could potentially increase the use of restorative justice for the benefit of victims, offenders and society at large. In connection with the latter, I want to present some preliminary thoughts on how restorative justice could be incorporated into future criminal justice systems as de jure punishment. Furthermore, I will suggest that by insisting that restorative justice is radically different from punishment, restorative justice advocates may - contrary to their intentions − play into the hands of those who want to preserve the status quo rather than developing future criminal justice systems in the direction of restorative justice.


Christian Gade
Christian Gade is an Associate Professor of Human Security and Anthropology at Aarhus University and a mediator in the Danish victim-offender mediation programme (Konfliktråd). Corresponding author: Christian Gade at gade@cas.au.dk. Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Pernille Reese, head of the Danish Victim-Offender Mediation Secretariat, for our many dialogues about restorative justice and punishment. Furthermore, I am grateful to Søren Rask Bjerre Christensen and Isabelle Sauer for their thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this article. Last but not least, I would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback.
Article

Access_open Retribution, restoration and the public dimension of serious wrongs

Journal The International Journal of Restorative Justice, Issue 1 2022
Keywords public wrongs, R.A. Duff, agent-relative values, criminalisation, punishment
Authors Theo van Willigenburg
AbstractAuthor's information

    Restorative justice has been criticised for not adequately giving serious consideration to the ‘public’ character of crimes. By bringing the ownership of the conflict involved in crime back to the victim and thus ‘privatising’ the conflict, restorative justice would overlook the need for crimes to be treated as public matters that concern all citizens, because crimes violate public values, i.e., values that are the foundation of a political community. Against this I argue that serious wrongs, like murder or rape, are violations of agent-neutral values that are fundamental to our humanity. By criminalising such serious wrongs we show that we take such violations seriously and that we stand in solidarity with victims, not in their capacity as compatriots but as fellow human beings. Such solidarity is better expressed by organising restorative procedures that serve the victim’s interest than by insisting on the kind of public condemnation and penal hardship that retributivists deem necessary ‘because the public has been wronged’. The public nature of crimes depends not on the alleged public character of the violated values but on the fact that crimes are serious wrongs that provoke a (necessarily reticent) response from government officials such as police, judges and official mediators.


Theo van Willigenburg
Theo van Willigenburg is Research Fellow at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Faculteit Religie en Theologie, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Corresponding author: Theo van Willigenburg at t.van.willigenburg@vu.nl.

Claudia Mazzucato
Claudia Mazzucato is Associate professor of Criminal Law at Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy. She has known the Parents Circle-Families Forum since 2005 and is engaged with them in joint projects concerning restorative responses to political and collective violence and violent extremism. Corresponding author: Claudia Mazzucato at claudia.mazzucato@unicatt.it.

Gerry Johnstone
Gerry Johnstone is a Professor of Law at the University of Hull, UK. Corresponding author: Gerry Johnstone at J.G.Johnstone@hull.ac.uk.
Article

Mediation in Greece: The ‘Formal’ and Various ‘Informal’ Types, Off- and Online

The Architecture of Mediation in Greece – Shifting towards a Culture That Values Consensus-Building

Journal Corporate Mediation Journal, Issue 2 2021
Keywords mediation, Greece, special forms, mandatory, online, informal types
Authors Dimitris Emvalomenos
Author's information

Dimitris Emvalomenos
Dimitris Emvalomenos, Lawyer, LL.M., Accredited Mediator of the Greek Ministry of Justice & the Centre of Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR), London, UK, Dep. Managing Partner at the law firm ‘Bahas, Gramatidis & Partners LLP’ (BGP).
Article

Preparing Mediators for Text-Based Mediations on ODR Platforms

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 2 2021
Keywords online dispute resolution (ODR), mediation, dispute resolution, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), mediation training, text-based systems
Authors Joseph van ’t Hooft, Wan Zhang and Sarah Mader
AbstractAuthor's information

    The COIVD-19 pandemic has drawn an increasing level of attention to the role of online dispute resolution (ODR) in dispute resolution systems. As ODR becomes increasingly prevalent, unique characteristics of conducting text-based mediations via ODR platforms begin to surface, warranting discussion on modifying mediator practises to adapt to ODR platforms. This article shines a light on the advantages and disadvantages of text-based mediations through interviews with court administrators and mediators with text-based mediation experience. Accordingly, this article proposes recommendations on training mediators to use ODR platforms and modifying their practises to achieve the best outcomes in text-based mediations. Focusing on the qualitative data and information gathered from these conducted interviews, this article seeks to offer practical advice about preparing mediators to participate in text-based mediations.


Joseph van ’t Hooft
Joseph van ’t Hooft is Juris Doctor Candidate (graduating in 2022) at The Ohio State University, Moritz College of Law.

Wan Zhang
Wan Zhang is Juris Doctor Candidate (graduating in 2022) at The Ohio State University, Moritz College of Law.

Sarah Mader
Sarah Mader is Juris Doctor Candidate (graduating in 2022) at The Ohio State University, Moritz College of Law.
Article

The Use of Technology (and Other Measures) to Increase Court Capacity

A View from Australia

Journal International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution, Issue 2 2021
Keywords court capacity, COVID-19, Australia, online dispute resolution, open justice, procedural fairness, access to justice, online courts, justice technology, judicial function
Authors Felicity Bell, Michael Legg, Joe McIntyre e.a.
AbstractAuthor's information

    The COVID-19 pandemic has forced courts around the world to embrace technology and other innovative measures in order to continue functioning. This article explores how Australian courts have approached this challenge. We show how adaptations in response to the pandemic have sometimes been in tension with principles of open justice, procedural fairness and access to justice, and consider how courts have attempted to resolve that tension.


Felicity Bell
Felicity Bell is a Research Fellow for the Law Society of NSW’s Future of Law and Innovation in the Profession (FLIP) research stream at UNSW Law, Sydney.

Michael Legg
Michael Legg is Professor and Director of the FLIP stream at UNSW Law, Sydney.

Joe McIntyre
Joe McIntyre is a Senior Lecturer in Law at UniSA: Justice and Society, University of South Australia.

Anna Olijnyk
Anna Olijnyk is a Senior Lecturer and Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit at Adelaide Law School, University of Adelaide, South Australia.
Showing 1 - 20 of 1300 results
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 49 50
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.