LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

ODR workshop – Law of the Future Conference, Den Hague, June 24 2011 May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning – mbk@juripax.com

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 like
employment
divorce
small claims/e-commerce
personal injury
Provided as an ASP solution
Web-based, on demand, fee per case
no need to invest in /deploy software
Training institute

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

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

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

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

The future of ODR? or A future for ODR?

Interoperability
“ To make solutions to disputes more accessible we need to make ODR platforms open and participatory”
http://juripax.com/en/vision.html

Engineered to run on cell phones (PDA support)

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

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)

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 3 rd , 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. )

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?

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

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_address]
www.juripax.com
+ 31623308359

Questions?

LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning

by HiiL on Jul 22, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

LOTF2011 | May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning — Presentation Transcript