Cambridge Cross Border Internet Dispute Resolution

COVER......Page 1
HALF-TITLE......Page 3
TITLE......Page 5
COPYRIGHT......Page 6
CONTENTS......Page 7
ILLUSTRATIONS......Page 12
TABLES......Page 13
England and Scotland......Page 14
TABLE OF UK STATUTES......Page 22
TABLE OF UK STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS......Page 25
TABLE OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION AND DOCUMENTS......Page 26
TABLE OF FOREIGN STATUTES......Page 28
TABLE OF TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS......Page 31
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......Page 32
ABBREVIATIONS......Page 33
1 Introduction......Page 35
2.1 Introduction......Page 38
2.2.1 Equal treatment of the parties......Page 39
2.2.3 Effectiveness......Page 40
Counterpoise......Page 41
2.3 Process values and forms of procedural justice......Page 42
2.3.1 Process values......Page 43
2.3.2 The Rawlsian concept of procedural justice......Page 44
2.4 Due process......Page 47
2.5 The difference principle: counter-balancing existing inequalities......Page 48
2.6 The inherent conflict between due process and effectiveness......Page 51
2.7 Conclusion......Page 52
3.2 Characteristics of the Internet......Page 53
3.2.1 Location irrelevant for functionality......Page 54
3.2.2 Difficulty of establishing location of Internet users......Page 55
3.2.3 Increase in transnational contacts – a quantitative and qualitative change......Page 57
3.2.4 Conclusion: the implications for Internet disputes......Page 59
3.3 Examples of Internet disputes......Page 60
3.4 Contract and tort......Page 62
3.5.2 ‘Repeat player’ effect and power......Page 63
3.5.3 Vulnerability......Page 65
3.6.1 Meaning of ‘consumer’ under different laws and regulations......Page 66
3.6.2 A preliminary definition: widening the scope......Page 69
3.6.3 The definition of relevant Internet disputes and its purpose......Page 70
3.7 Definition of relevant disputes in respect of the size of the claim......Page 71
Credit-card chargeback explained......Page 72
Protection against fraudulent misuse of all payment cards......Page 75
3.8.2 PayPal......Page 76
3.8.3 Conclusion......Page 77
3.9 The jurisdictional challenge of the Internet......Page 78
3.10 Conclusion......Page 79
4.1 Introduction......Page 81
4.2 ADR......Page 82
Mediation explained......Page 84
How mediation works, and its purpose......Page 86
4.2.2 Arbitration......Page 92
4.3.1 Law of the arbitration agreement, the lex arbitri and applicable law distinguished......Page 94
4.3.2 Options......Page 95
Choice of law......Page 97
No choice of law......Page 98
4.3.4 Conclusion: the challenge of applicable law......Page 99
Mandatory laws explained......Page 100
Mandatory rules applied in practice......Page 104
4.4 Conclusion......Page 107
5.2 Definition of ODR......Page 108
5.3.1 Brief overview......Page 109
5.3.2 Case study: Austrian Internet Ombudsman......Page 110
5.4 Technologies used......Page 112
5.4.1 Online mediation......Page 113
5.4.3 Automated negotiation – blind bidding......Page 115
5.4.5 Online arbitration......Page 116
5.5.1 Technology as the fourth party in ODR......Page 120
Empowering communication......Page 121
Psychological effect of online communication – dealing with negative emotions......Page 122
5.5.2 Transformative power: greater access to justice......Page 123
5.6 Conclusion......Page 124
6.2 Sources of legal due process......Page 125
6.2.1 Professional codes of conduct and contract for arbitral services......Page 126
6.2.2 Institutional and other arbitration rules......Page 127
6.2.3 National arbitration legislation......Page 129
6.2.4 English common law......Page 131
6.2.5 Human rights standards......Page 132
ECHR......Page 133
US constitutional due process standards......Page 143
6.2.6 International conventions and standards......Page 144
6.3.1 Impartiality and independence of judges......Page 146
Defining impartiality and independence......Page 147
Independence and the relevant risk assessment......Page 148
The English Arbitration Act 1996 and the common law......Page 152
Important differences between arbitrators and judges......Page 154
Arbitrators as men or women of business......Page 156
Payment and the ‘repeat player’ syndrome......Page 158
Appointment by the parties......Page 159
Systemic bias......Page 160
Disclosure......Page 162
6.3.3 Conclusion......Page 163
6.4.1 Prior notice......Page 164
Fair hearing – the principle......Page 165
Amorphous nature of the requirements of fair hearing......Page 166
Fair hearing in arbitration......Page 168
6.5. Duty to give reasons......Page 174
6.6 Transparency versus confidentiality......Page 178
6.6.1 The case for transparency......Page 179
Informational equality......Page 180
Scrutiny as quality assurance......Page 181
Development of the law......Page 182
6.6.3 What should be kept confidential?......Page 183
6.6.5 Contract and institutional rules......Page 184
6.6.6 Arbitration laws......Page 186
6.6.7 Conclusion: an inadequate balance under English law......Page 193
6.7 Right of appeal / judicial review of arbitration awards......Page 194
6.8 Conclusion......Page 201
7.1 Introduction......Page 203
7.2 Legal controls on the use of arbitration clauses in consumer contracts......Page 205
7.2.1 Subject-matter arbitrability......Page 207
Small-claims disputes......Page 208
Regulation of unfair contract terms......Page 209
Conclusion: English law......Page 213
7.2.3 Control of adhesion contracts under US state law......Page 214
7.2.4 A critique of consumer arbitration......Page 216
The risk of systemic bias against consumer complainants......Page 217
No reasons and no appeal......Page 218
7.2.5 Conclusion......Page 219
7.3.1 Brief description of the UDRP......Page 220
Independence and impartiality......Page 224
Notice and service to the respondent......Page 231
Fair hearing: minimum standards and equality......Page 232
Language......Page 241
Use of online technology......Page 243
Lack of appeal and inconsistency of decisions......Page 244
Transparency......Page 247
7.4 Proportionate model of dispute resolution......Page 248
7.4.2 The waiver doctrine – fully informed and voluntary approach......Page 249
7.4.3 Internet disputes and the waiver doctrine......Page 250
7.4.4 The proportionate model explained......Page 251
7.5 Conclusion......Page 252
8.1 Introduction......Page 254
8.2 Bringing the parties to arbitration......Page 255
8.2.1 Contractually mandated schemes......Page 257
Arbitration agreement between participants......Page 258
Arbitration agreement for the benefit of a third-party claimant......Page 259
Contractually mandated schemes in practice......Page 260
8.2.2 Compulsory statutory arbitration......Page 264
Ombudsman schemes for communication disputes......Page 265
Financial Ombudsman Service......Page 266
Classification of compulsory arbitration/ombudsman services as arbitration......Page 267
Compulsory ombudsman/adjudication scheme for Internet disputes......Page 271
8.3 Standards for online arbitration of Internet disputes - findings from previous chapters......Page 272
Independence and impartiality of the arbitrators......Page 273
Independence of the institution......Page 274
8.3.3 Fair hearing......Page 276
8.3.4 Reasons for decisions and transparency......Page 277
8.4 Implementation of the standards......Page 278
8.4.1 Institutional rules......Page 279
8.4.3 An international convention on enforcement of awards......Page 280
8.4.4 Referral systems / clearing house......Page 281
8.5 Proportionality, costs and state funding......Page 283
8.6 The model: resolution of Internet disputes......Page 288
De minimis......Page 289
Contractually mandated online arbitration......Page 290
UK National Online Ombudsman Office......Page 291
New convention to overcome two potential obstacles to the New York Convention......Page 293
8.7 Conclusion......Page 294
8.8.3 For E-commerce websites generally......Page 295
8.8.6 For governments and regulators......Page 296
BIBLIOGRAPHY......Page 298
INDEX......Page 308