lotf2011 | may-britt kollenhof-bruning

16
ODR workshop – Law of the Future Conference, Den Hague, June 24 2011 May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning – [email protected]

Upload: hiil

Post on 21-Nov-2014

1.123 views

Category:

Business


1 download

DESCRIPTION

Law of the Future 2011 23 & 24 June 2011, Peace Palace, The Hague, The Netherlands Title: JURIPAX: Technology for early dispute resolution By: May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning Workshop: Online Dispute Resolution www.lawofthefuture.org

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

ODR workshop – Law of the Future Conference, Den Hague, June 24 2011

May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning – [email protected]

Page 2: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

What is Juripax?

An independent, international technology and service provider with offices in the Netherlands and Germany

Juripax’ solutions for Online Dispute Resolution (ODR):Suited for claim-handling and dispute-resolution practices Built on the concept of adding advanced Web 2.0 technology to:

research-based concepts practical experience

Dedicated prep & intake solutions for a variety of disputes likeemploymentdivorcesmall claims/e-commerce personal injury

Provided as an ASP solutionWeb-based, on demand, fee per caseno need to invest in /deploy software

Training institute

Page 3: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Juripax’ vision and mission

Modern technology and innovation is the key to continued access to justice

The Internet as a global public resource should also be able to provide disputants with tools for self-help and self-determination

Juripax’ goal is to be a leading provider of ODR models that enhance efficiency in judicial and dispute-resolution processes and create economic value for the public benefit

Page 4: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

What has been achieved?

Prove the case for ODR - in terms of effectiveness and efficiency

Development and implementation of process-driven software

80% – generic

20% – dispute-type specific and customizable/customized

Multilingual capability and cross-cultural competence

Industry-standard level ref. confidentiality and data security

ODR-training: 1. system 2. dynamics of online negotiation and mediation (accredited by Legal Aids Board and Dutch Mediation Institute)

Integration of user feedback loops and submission to scientific research

5000 cases processed

Page 5: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Juripax’s main areas of operation

Complaint handling and assisted (direct) negotiation(semi) governmental exclusive co-operation with Dutch Complaints Review

Board• organization for distance sellers • Several Industry sector organization

commercial • telecom providers – customer disputes (customer service)

two-tier service in 1) facilitating the handling of complaints and – if disputes cannot be prevented – 2) to assist parties to effectively resolve these

Traditional disputes – family and workplace • Fully online of hybrid - primary use in the preparation of traditional or judicial

proceedings• Legal aid board – file divorces and resolve issues online • Judicial and mediation services providers – workplace and family law

 

Page 6: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Findings and Statistics

Rating factors Degree of Satisfaction

Settlement rate(s) 80%

Satisfaction with the outcome/agreement 75%

Opportunity to express views and interests 80%

Quality and competence of the mediator 80%

The overall quality and “appropriateness”

of the process 80 %

The user-friendliness of the platform 8,5 (score 1-10)

Likelihood that agreement will hold 70%

Likelihood that users will use online

mediation again/recommend to others 80%

Efficiency: compared to the average length of a face-to-face procedure, savings in time and costs of 30% to 40% are feasible

Page 7: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

The future of ODR? or A future for ODR?

Page 8: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Interoperability

“To make solutions to disputes more accessible we need to make ODR platforms open and participatory”

http://juripax.com/en/vision.html

Page 9: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Engineered to run on cell phones (PDA support)

Page 10: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

ODR - suitability and applicable areas

Address grievances and complaints at an early stage (avoid these escalating into disputes)

“effective complaints handling is more important than effective third-party dispute resolution” (ABA Taskforce, 2002)

Conflicts that are not outside the norm as they are extremely appropriate to benefit from the “power” of the Internet

In cases of power imbalances (e.g. hierarchical relationships): to reduce power (im)balances and positively influence the "enabling"/"empowering"-factor

In highly escalated circumstances and conflicts: to normalize / bring structure to the (perceived) chaos

In cases where the complexity and the value of the subject matter sufficiently justify an effective preparation (to maximize the effectiveness of the subsequent proceedings)

As an “add-on”, efficiency enhancing tool for traditional procedures

Page 11: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Opportunities

find ways to bypass existing ‘redress’ mechanism focus on areas were ODR is not a ‘threat’ and/or for which there are no offline equivalents

focus on increased added-value along the chain (questions issues complaints disputes)• apply ODR as a default to solve cases within the norm and apply more

costly (human) and legal resources only if these are really needed (80/20%)

• focus on enhanced intelligence and automation (reducing the role of human factor)

• achieve critical mass needed 1. to obtain “credibility” amongst the public, as an appropriate alternative 2. to achieve a viable business model (recurring fees, scalability)

Page 12: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Commercial goals vs Public Benefit Commercial interest

Viable business model and ‘credibility’ • critical mass needed

obtaining ‘legitimacy’ • how to engender ‘trust’, as long

the public associates ADR/ODR with ‘the law’?

liability issues• separating 3rd, 4th and 5th party • complex contractual relationships

lack of clear guidelines/ regulation• ‘information society- ‘or ‘ODR

‘provider ?• data retention• Adhere to distance selling

directive?• accreditation of ODR-providers

Public interest

due process requirements• Impartiality, predictability,

transparency, affordability etc.

protection of consumers• consumer wants appropriate

redress at no or at the lowest costs

forum shopping possibility/interoperability

- escalate to other out-of court or/and court redress mech.

- availability of appellate process - communication in native language- “Internationalization” of conflict

and / or settlement agreement (jurisdictional issues, enforceability etc. )

Page 13: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Viable business model

find (innovative) alternatives for funding/’restructure’ current funding schemes for disputes involving consumers

How to realize appropriate redress at no or at the lowest costs?• the Internet is increasingly giving consumers more and more power.

Is it likely that this trend will ultimately result in consumers organizing themselves (empowering, self-determination etc.) and have them take a share in the cost?

• legal protection insurers?• separate ODR-technology and ODR-services provider

Engaging ODR-technology providers through RFP as an add-on to current and new services provider

• role of the government?

Page 14: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Commercial involvement?

“Commercial involvement in the development of ODR is a prerequisite for establishing the right balance between commercial goals and public benefit”

http://juripax.com/en/vision.html

Page 15: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Learn more…..

Watch our video• link: http://www.juripax.com

Sign up for a free trial• link: https://live.juripax.com/php/userguide/userguide.php?

lgset=en&directlink=235

Contact us at• [email protected]• www.juripax.com• + 31623308359

Page 16: LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

Questions?