E-Arbitration-T Project – Online Dispute Resolution

The 10th edition of ODR Cyberweek, Cyberweek 2007, will occur October 15 – 19, 2007. Cyberweek consists of many different kinds of activities and opportunities, from Skypecasts to Podcasts to discussion forums and more, all related to the topic of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). Cyberweek is a free all-online conference and we invite you join us in both asynchronous and real-time events. Last year, we had several hundred participants from over forty countries Last year’s program is still accessible. Read the rest of this entry »

Arbitration forum in Bahrain

Bahrain will host a 10-day conference on arbitration which is expected to be attended by international experts. The event, beginning on November 10, will focus on settling commercial disputes between Islamic financial establishments and will offer solutions based on Islamic law.

Speakers include UN General Assembly president Shaikha Haya bint Rashid Al Khalifa, International Court of Arbitration chairman Pierre Tercier and president of the Paris-based International Chamber of Commerce Institute of International Business Law Serge Lazarev. Read the rest of this entry »

Labor disputes arbitration in China

China‘s top legislature started to read the draft law on labor dispute mediation and arbitration amid an increasing number of labor disputes that emerged in the country. The draft law was submitted Sunday to the seven-day 29th session of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC), or China’s top legislature, for the first reading. Arbitration in labor dispute cases will be important because in China are continuously increasing in recent years. Statistics show that labor dispute arbitration organizations at various levels dealt with 1.72 million labor dispute cases involving 5.32 million employees from 1987 to the end of 2005, with a growth rate of 27.3 percent annually.

Xin Chunying, vice Chairman of the Legislative Affairs Commission of the NPC Standing Committee said on the legislative session that excepting the increasing number of labor disputes, other problems also exist. For instance, the personnel in arbitration organizations are not professional and thus lack credibility and the process of arbitrating labor disputes is long, making the cost of arbitration high. Read the rest of this entry »

Cybersettle owns the patent on a computerized dispute resolution method. Disputing parties make settlement bids into a computer. If there is a close-enough match between the parties, the case is settled. A party may pre-submit multiple bids to be used in consecutive bidding rounds.

The National Arbitrators Forum (NAF) is a private corporation that handles arbitration and was sued for infringement — apparently after conducting 100,000+ such resolutions. NAF lost its infringement suit, but appealed on claim construction.

Cybersettle’s claimed method includes the steps of “receiving a plurality of demands [and] a plurality of settlement offers.” The lower court, however, did not require the receipt of multiple offers and demands. Rather, the claim was construed to be satisfied if the system “has the capacity to receive multiple offers and demands, even if ony one demand and one offer are received.” Read the rest of this entry »

OECD urges to overhaul e-consumer dispute resolution – ODR or ADR

OECD countries have agreed a new approach to better protect the rights of consumers and make online shopping safer. They call on national authorities and business to make it easier, cheaper and quicker for people to resolve complaints and get compensation when they are unhappy with goods or services they have bought. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD.

The OECD Recommendation on Consumer Dispute Resolution and Redress offers a roadmap for consumer protection agencies to address the practical and legal obstacles that many consumers face when trying to exchange goods or get their money back from firms, in their own country or abroad.

Most OECD countries already have laws or self-regulated schemes to help consumers, ranging from small claims courts to credit card protection and collective action lawsuits. But most of these were designed before e-commerce took off and are poorly suited to handling cross-border complaints. The Recommendation advises countries on steps they should take to update their laws to take into account these new developments.

It also calls on member countries to develop bi-lateral or multi-lateral arrangements in order to improve international judicial co-operation and use technology more effectively, making it easier to share information across borders.

In addition to a framework that details the basic elements necessary to an effective consumer dispute resolution and redress mechanism, it highlights the need for countries, both at a government level and via consumer protection agencies, to tell consumers who to approach when they have a problem and what they can do to resolve it. Companies should also set out clear, simple policies that explain what steps customers should follow to make a complaint and then have it resolved.

Consumers should also have the right to band together to take legal action against a firm, known as “collective action lawsuits.” This is important because in most European countries even if consumers have the right to take collective action in principle, there are so many restrictions that in practice they cannot. This means that their only option is take a firm to court on their own, which is usually too expensive for most people to even consider.

The Recommendation builds on a substantial body of OECD work carried out over the past decade on consumer policy issues. These include the 1999 OECD Guidelines for Consumer Protection in the Context of Electronic Commerce (www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/13/34023235.pdf), the 2003 OECD Guidelines for Protecting Consumers from Fraudulent and Deceptive Commercial Practices Across Borders ( www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/33/2956464.pdf) and a 2005 Report on Consumer Dispute Resolution and Redress in the Global Marketplace (www.oecd.org/dataoecd/26/61/36456184.pdf).

See the full text of the Recommendation. For further information, journalists are invited to contact Peter Avery, OECD’s Science, Technology and Industry Directorate (+ 33. 1. 45. 24. 93. 63).

For furher information, see www.oecd.org/sti/consumer-policy

Judges have finished evaluating the entries for the 2007 World Chambers Competition and have announced the 20 finalists who have made it to the last round of the competition, which will take place in Istanbul in July.
With over 55 entries from 38 countries received this year, the competition has been the most popular and diverse in its history. All finalists will be invited to present their projects to the international judging panel at the Fifth World Chambers Congress in Istanbul from 4-6 July 2007. Read the rest of this entry »

Arbitration is increasingly seen as the preferred way to resolve cross-border business disputes, in a world where traditional litigation often spells headaches, uncertainty and lost time. The ICC International Court of Arbitration, the world’s best-known arbitral institution, will host a two-day workshop in San Francisco on international dispute resolution, June 11 to 12 the Westin St. Francis to help lawyers and business executives better understand the ins and outs of this fast-growing field.

The court is part of the International Chamber of Commerce, the world business body that has been in the forefront of cross-border dispute resolution since 1923. The workshop is designed to provide a better understanding of ICC arbitration and the other dispute resolution services. Organizers aim to showcase practical strategies and tactics for those involved in international arbitration. Read the rest of this entry »

ICT Strategy of India: an Online Disptute Resolution ODR Perspective

The aim of this article is to stress upon the importance of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for resolving contemporary electronic commerce (e-commerce) and other disputes. The best example of the same is the use of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) for resolving these disputes and misunderstandings. The Online Dispute Resolution Mechanism (ODRM) is gaining popularity among all the countries of the World, including India. There are, however, certain prerequisites that must be satisfied before ODRM can be effectively established and used in India.

I. Introduction

In the present globalised and decentralised world, India cannot afford to keep its economy closed and secluded. Thus, an interaction between Indian economy and world’s economy is inevitable. That is not a big problem. The real problem is to make Indian economy an efficient and competitive economy. Though there are many indicators for measuring the strengths and weaknesses of an economy, but the ICT strategy of a nation is very crucial to put it on a global map. It is very important that the ICT strategy and policies of a nation must not only be suitable but should also believe in a “holistic application and implementation”. The ICT strategy and policy of a nation cannot afford to keep the different components of ICT[1] separate. Their amalgamation and supplementation must be done at a priority basis otherwise the ICT strategy and policy will not bring the desired results.[2] The present ICT strategy and policies of India are deficient and defective.[3] It must be appreciated that the ICT is directly related to International Trade, more particularly e-commerce. Thus, when the Indian economy will be integrated with the Global economy certain disputes are bound to be there. We cannot use the traditional litigation methods to resolve those disputes. That will only put more pressure on the already overburdened courts. The fact is that the increasing backlog of cases is posing a big threat to our judicial system. The same was even more in the early 90 but due to the computerisation process in the Supreme Court and other courts that was reduced to a great extent. However, the backlog is still alarming.[4] This is because mere computerisation of Courts or other Constitutional offices will not make much difference. What we need is a will and desire to use the same for speedy disposal of various assignments. There is a lack of training among Judges regarding use of Information Technology (IT). We need a sound training of Judges first before we wish to capatilise the benefits of IT. A good initiative has already been taken by the Supreme Court.[5] However, the same appears to be dormant for the time being. Thus, we need a public initiative as well.[6] Besides, the use of ICT for ODR purposes is also inevitable due to the mandates of the “right to speedy trial” that is provided by the Constitution of India. Read the rest of this entry »

International Dispute Resolution in United Kingdom UK

World of Arbitration In a civilised society, citizens look to the courts to settle their disputes. The courts put judges at the disposal of the parties, the courts determine the substantive and procedural law which is to be applied and the courts enforce their own orders through court officers, when necessary. It is a one-stop shop.

For those engaged in alternative dispute resolution – ADR, the courts are available not merely to enforce decisions and awards but also to supervise and control the chosen ADR procedures, should matters go awry.

Where disputes arise in the international arena, the picture is a little different because national courts are rarely acceptable to both sides. Disputes between states or between an individual and a foreign state or between an individual and an international organisation may be regarded as being in a special category, where the aggrieved party may have recourse to treaty arbitration. Examples are arbitration before the PCA1 and arbitration under the auspices of ICSID2. Beyond that special category, the parties must make express provision for dispute resolution in their agreement, failing which the aggrieved party will be left to seek his remedy from the domestic courts of one country or another, depending upon which will assume jurisdiction.

The result is a contrast. Whereas national courts often represent a convenient and acceptable means of dispute resolution for parties to a dispute which has no international element, there is no international equivalent. In consequence, most international disputes fall to be resolved through a process or by a tribunal which is essentially consensual in origin.

This paper is concerned with the resolution of disputes arising under international construction contracts. The purpose is to survey the available alternatives and to identify some of the considerations to be borne in mind by those concerned. In this last context, the emphasis is on two key considerations, being enforcement and applicable law. Read the rest of this entry »

InterDigital vs Samsung arbitration awards

Wireless technology company InterDigital Communications Corp. announced it has been awarded $134 million by an arbitrator in a decade-long royalty dispute with South Korean-based Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

The arbitration award for InterDigital (King of Prussia, Pa.) covers past royalties plus interest on Samsung’s sale of single mode 2G GSM/TDMA and 2.5G GSM/GPRS/EDGE terminal units through 2005. The arbitrator said Samsung would have to pay InterDigital $17 to $21 million to cover royalties for the first half of 2006.

In a separate matter, the arbitrator determined that Samsung has not obtained the broader CDMA and 3G patent license rights in the Nokia agreement with InterDigital.

In Feb. 1996, Samsung entered agreements with InterDigital which covered both technology development and patent licenses. As part of the agreements, Samsung paid approximately $35 million up front to InterDigital. Read the rest of this entry »