Cyberjustice Explained

Cyberjustice is the incorporation of technology into the justice system, either through offering court services electronically or through the use of electronics within courtrooms or for other dispute resolution purposes.[1] One of the most crucial goals of cyberjustice is increasing access to justice through both reducing the costs associated with administering justice as well as reducing the burden on the judges and the court system as a whole.[2] [3] [4]

Electronic justice services

Several electronic services are available in various court systems worldwide. For example, there are several electronic courtrooms[5] [6] [7] [8] [9] that have integrated information and communications technologies such as video-conferencing, holographic evidence presentation technology or other communications technologies in addition to various systems or applications meant to aid in the conduction of the proceedings as well as the presentation of evidence. Additionally, throughout the entire process there is what is known as an electronic case management system available to the parties, their lawyers and judges, that allow them to keep track of what is taking place in the case through the Internet and permit them to file court documents and proceedings electronically[10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] or access information relative to the case. Furthermore, many jurisdictions allow for the discovery of documents to be done electronically through the use of electronic discovery systems.[32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] Once a case has been finalized and has become public information, these court records as well as judgements[39] [40] [41] can be made available electronically to members of the public.

Online dispute resolution

In addition to the use of technology for the purposes of litigation, the term cyberjustice also encompasses the domain of online dispute resolution,[42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] whose aim is to aid in the resolution of disputes prior to having to resort to the courts. Several mechanism for this type of electronic dispute resolution are available, namely cyber-negotiation, cyber-mediation and cyber-arbitration. The first can be classified as either assisted, which employs technologies for the purposes of communication, agenda development and adoption of solutions, or automated, where specialized software acts as a negotiator between the parties. For its part, cyber-mediation will often be an alternative where cyber-mediation was unfruitful and it involves a third party’s intervention to assist the parties in reaching an agreement.[54] Finally, cyber-arbitration is different from the preceding two types of dispute resolution in that it is adjudicatory, and therefore must adhere to specified formal rules, as well as that parties never contact one another but rather communicate via an arbitrator.

Cyberjustice initiatives

Cyberjustice has been integrated into the legal systems of several jurisdictions worldwide, including the European Union, Australia, the United States of America, and Canada. Several other international initiatives have been made.

The European Union

The European Union, for example has created the e-Justice Portal through which legislation case law and legal information may be accessed.[55] The European Union also offers two other cyberjustice services, namely e-CODEX, which simplifies cross-border litigations by providing access to electronic delivery services, electronic signatures, electronic payments, electronic authentication and electronic documents, and e-CURIA, which is essentially just an e-filing system. Additionally, other countries within the European Union have incorporated certain technologies into their adjudication of justice, such as the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain. The United Kingdom runs Money Claim Online (MCOL), a service that allows a claim to be instituted online against two people at most who owe up to a maximum of £100,000 that they refuse to pay.[56] Italy offers Trial Online,[57] which is essentially both an electronic filing system and a case management system. Spain has passed laws whose aim is to regulate technology used in conjunction with the legal system[58] and has ultimately resulted in the incorporation of technology in the legal system for the purposes of treating data and managing legal files, not the least of which is LexNET which enables the secure transfer of judicial data.

Australia

Australia offers e-filing services, online courtroom and online case management services,[59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] and is the first jurisdiction to have used a fully electronic courtroom for the hearing of a high-profile criminal case.[69]

The United States of America

The United States of America has several electronic courtrooms. For example, the McGlothlin Courtroom, located at the William and Mary College of Law, is one of the few to possess technology making it possible to publish court transcripts online in real time,[70] and was the first to use holographic evidence display and immersive technology.[71]

Canada

Several developments have been made in Canada for electronic access to court records and judgments and electronic case management systems, but its only fully electronic courtroom is on the premises of the University of Montreal. Known as the Cyberjustice Laboratory, this courtroom employs some of the most advanced courtroom technologies, such as audio-visual technology allowing for multi-videoconferencing, and the presentation of evidence in different forms, including 3D evidence via a digital retro-projector and the option of live annotation of evidence while it is being presented.[72] One of the particular developments of the Cyberjustice Laboratory is the platform known as PARLe (Platform to Assist in the Resolution of Litigation electronically), which aids in the resolution of low-intensity disputes via the Internet.[73]

International initiatives

Several international cyberjustice initiatives have been made. They include ICANN’s Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP), which was created to settle disputes regarding trademark infringement in domain names and issues arising out of cybersquatting and typosquatting.[74] [75] The ICANN Electronic Consumer Dispute Resolution (ECODIR) offered a free and voluntary dispute resolution service that began with negotiation and, if not successful, proceeded to mediation and ultimately the recommendation of a solution by the mediator; but this service has been terminated. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) was exploring the possibility of developing an online dispute resolution system to take care of cross-border disputes resulting from e-commerce.[76] [77] [78]

Notes and References

  1. 1336379. Online Dispute Resolution. Benyekhlef. Karim. 2005. Lex Electronica. Gélinas. Fabien. 5. 10:2.
  2. Human Rights: A Speed Bump For Arbitral Procedures? An Exploration of Safeguards in the Acceleration of Justice. Schultz. Thomas. 2006. International Arbitration Law Review . 9 . 1 . 8. 896535.
  3. Designing and Implementing e-Justice Systems: Some Lessons Learned from EU and Canadian Examples. Lupo. Giampiero. 2014. Laws. Bailey. Jane. 354.
  4. Code source et sources codifiées: pour une cyberjustice québécoise ouverte et accessible. Vermeys. Nicolas. 2010. Lex Electronica. 14:3. 2–4.
  5. Web site: Review of the Extent of Courtroom Technology in Australia. 2004. February 5, 2015. Macdonald. Ros. Wallace. Anne.
  6. Web site: Effective Use of Courtroom Technology: A Judge's Guide to Pretrial and Trial. February 5, 2015. The Federal Judicial Center.
  7. Web site: Software. February 5, 2015. Cyberjustice Laboratory. https://web.archive.org/web/20150107074748/http://www.cyberjustice.ca/en/software-presentation/. January 7, 2015. dead.
  8. Web site: The High Tech Courtroom. February 5, 2015. Solomon. Samuel H.. Gruen. Martin. https://web.archive.org/web/20050518024533/http://www.ninja9.org/courtadmin/mis/High%20Tech%20Presentation.pdf. May 18, 2005. dead.
  9. Web site: Courtroom Technology: A Status Report. 2004. February 5, 2015. Lederer. Frederic I.. https://web.archive.org/web/20150912162413/http://www.legaltechcenter.net/download/articles/Courtroom%20Technology,%20A%20Status%20Report.pdf. September 12, 2015. dead.
  10. Web site: Federal Court(Canada). cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca. 2016-02-04. en. https://web.archive.org/web/20150906151652/http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/fc_cf_en/E-Filing. 2015-09-06. dead.
  11. Web site: Court Services Online - e-Filing: Frequently Asked Questions. March 10, 2015. British Columbia, Ministry of Justice.
  12. Web site: E-Filing Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador. www.court.nl.ca. 2016-02-04.
  13. Web site: Wills, Estates, and Guardianship E-Filing: Quick Reference Guide. March 10, 2015. Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.
  14. Web site: E-File Notice of Charter Application. albertacourts.ca. 2016-02-04.
  15. Web site: Welcome to CT Judicial Branch e-services. www.jud.ct.gov. 2016-02-04.
  16. Web site: Florida Courts E-Filing Portal. www.myflcourtaccess.com. 2016-02-04.
  17. Web site: Case Type and Document Exceptions to Electronic Filing. March 10, 2015. Connecticut Judicial Branch.
  18. Web site: eFileTexas.Gov Official E-Filing System for Texas. www.efiletexas.gov. 2016-02-04.
  19. Web site: E-Filing Instructions. nvcourts.gov. 2016-02-04.
  20. Web site: EFlex eFile Online Training Registration with the Delaware Courts. courts.delaware.gov. 2016-02-04.
  21. Web site: Court of Common Pleas Judicial Officers. courts.delaware.gov. 2016-02-04.
  22. Web site: eFiling in the Delaware Supreme Court. courts.delaware.gov. 2016-02-04.
  23. Web site: Superior Court of Delaware eFiling. courts.delaware.gov. 2016-02-04.
  24. Web site: User Guide to eFiling: Divorce Applications in family law. March 10, 2015. Family Law Courts. https://web.archive.org/web/20140127044737/http://www.familycourt.wa.gov.au/_files/FCWA_eFiling%20user%20guide_V1_14042010.pdf. January 27, 2014. dead.
  25. Web site: Welcome to the Commonwealth Courts Portal. March 10, 2015. Commonwealth Courts Portal.
  26. Web site: eLodgment. www.fedcourt.gov.au. 2012-09-27. 2016-02-04. Federal Court of Australia.
  27. Web site: eFiling. March 10, 2015. Family Court of Australia.
  28. Web site: eFiling and case management. www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au. 2016-02-04. en-au. Supreme Court of Victoria. https://web.archive.org/web/20160227133607/http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/home/forms+fees+and+services/efiling+and+case+management/#breadcrumbs. 2016-02-27. dead.
  29. Web site: Guide to eFiling. March 10, 2015. Supreme Court of Victoria. https://web.archive.org/web/20150317034405/http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/home/contact+us/publications/supreme+court+of+victoria+guide+to+efiling#breadcrumbs. March 17, 2015. dead.
  30. Web site: VIC County Court eFiling. www.confirm.com.au. 2013-09-06. 2019-07-05. CITEC.
  31. Web site: CITEC Confirm Court eFiling. July 5, 2019. CITEC Confirm.
  32. Web site: Guidelines for the Discovery o Electronic Documents in Ontario. March 10, 2015. eDiscovery Guidelines.
  33. Ediscovery: Preserving, Requesting and Producing Electronic Information. Arent. Lisa M.. 2002. Santa Clara High Tech L.J.. Brownstone. Robert D.. Fenwick. William A.. 19. 133.
  34. Web site: Comparing E-Discovery in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Mexico. Foggo. Gavin. Grosso. Suzanne. Harrison. Brett. Rodriguez-Barrera. Jose Victor. 2.
  35. Web site: Download publication The Sedona Conference®. thesedonaconference.org. 2016-02-04. https://web.archive.org/web/20170202081230/https://thesedonaconference.org/download-pub/3990. 2017-02-02. dead.
  36. Web site: Civil Justice Reform Project - Ministry of the Attorney General. www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca. 2016-02-04.
  37. Web site: E-Discovery in Canada. July 29, 2011. March 10, 2015. Manning. Kathryn J.. https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090905/http://dritoday.org/feature.aspx?id=93. March 4, 2016. dead.
  38. Web site: Electronic Discovery in Alberta - Applying the Rules and Standards: From Collection to Exchange. June 2009. March 11, 2015. Prince. Tamara R..
  39. Web site: Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII). www.austlii.edu.au. 2016-02-04.
  40. Web site: CanLII . Canadian Legal Information Institute.
  41. Web site: British and Irish Legal Information Institute. www.bailii.org. 2016-02-04.
  42. From Face-to-Face to Screen-to-Screen: Real Hope or Tue Fallacy?. Gillieron. Philippe. 2007. Ohio St. J. On Disp. Resol.. 23. 302.
  43. Web site: Recommended Best Practices For Online Dispute Resolution Service Providers. March 15, 2015. American Bar Association Task Force on eCommerce and ADR.
  44. Web site: Fields of work. www.cen.eu. 2016-02-04.
  45. Web site: OECD Recommendation on Consumer Dispute Resolution and Redress - OECD. www.oecd.org. 2016-02-04.
  46. Web site: European Commission - European Judicial Network - Alternative dispute resolution - Community law. ec.europa.eu. 2016-02-05.
  47. E-Commerce, E-Disputes, and E-Dispute Resolution: In the Shadow of "eBay Law". Katsh. Ethan. 2000. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution. 15:3. Janet. Rifkin. Gaitenby. Alan.
  48. Online Dispute Resolution in Consumer Disputes. Petrauskas. Feliksas. 2011. Jurisprudence. Kybartiene. Egle. 18:3.
  49. Online Consumer Dispute Resolution and the ODR Practice in Taiwan - A Comparative Analysis. Kao. Chi-Chung. 2009. Asian Social Science. 5 . 5:7. 10.5539/ass.v5n7p113 . free.
  50. Online Dispute Resolution: Consumer Redress in a Global Market Place. Calliess. Gralf-Peter. 2009. German Law Journal. 7:8.
  51. The potential of Online Dispute Resolution as a Consumer Redress Mechanism. 2007. Cortes. Pablo. 10.2139/ssrn.998865. 154492064 .
  52. Boosting Consumer Confidence in E-Business: Recommendations for Establishing Fair and Effective Dispute Resolution Programs for B2C Online Transactions. Ponte. Lucille M.. 2001. Alb. L.J. Si. & Tech.. 12.
  53. An Analysis of the UDRP Experience - Is it time for reform?. Cortes Dieguez. Juan Pablo. 2008. Computer Law & Security Report. 24.
  54. Online Mediation: Where We Have Been, Where We Are Now, and Where We Should Be. Cole. Sarah Rudolph. 2006. U. Tol. L. Rev.. Blankley. Kristen M.. 38.
  55. Web site: European e-Justice Portal. e-justice.europa.eu. 2016-02-05.
  56. Web site: Make a money claim online - GOV.UK. www.gov.uk. 2016-02-05.
  57. Web site: Some European and Australian e-Justice services. 2012. February 5, 2015. Fabri. Marco.
  58. Book: Martinez, Agusti Cerrilo i. E-Justice: Information and Communication Technologies in the Court System. Information Science Reference. 2009. New York. 101–102. E-Justice in Spain. Martinez. Agusti Cerrilo i. Abat. Pere Fabra i.
  59. Web site: Online Services. www.fedcourt.gov.au. 2012-09-27. 2016-02-05. Federal Court of Australia.
  60. Web site: eCourtroom. www.fedcourt.gov.au. 2012-09-27. 2016-02-05. Federal Court of Australia.
  61. Web site: High Court of Australia. www.hcourt.gov.au. 2016-02-05. en. The High Court of Australia.
  62. Web site: eServices. February 5, 2015. Family Court of Australia.
  63. Web site: eCourt. February 5, 2015. New South Wales Land and Environment Court. https://web.archive.org/web/20150209123415/http://www.lec.justice.nsw.gov.au/lec/ecourt.html,c=y. February 9, 2015. dead.
  64. Web site: eCallover. February 5, 2015. New South Wales Land and Environment Court. https://web.archive.org/web/20150209212908/http://www.lec.justice.nsw.gov.au/lec/ecourt/ecallover.html. February 9, 2015. dead.
  65. Web site: NSW Supreme, District & Local Courts Online Registry. www.service.nsw.gov.au. 2016-02-05. en.
  66. Web site: VCAT Online: Lodge applications via the internet (Residential Tenancies registered users only). March 20, 2015. Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal.
  67. Web site: Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII). www.austlii.edu.au. 2016-02-05.
  68. Web site: Using the Internet to Assist Court Processes: Delivery of Justice in an Electronic Age. February 5, 2015. Jackson. Sheryl. Macdonald. Ros.
  69. Book: E-Justice: Information and Communication Technologies in the Court System. Potter. Sandra. Information Science Reference. 2009. New York. Farrelly. Phil. Begg. Derek. The E-Court Roadmap: Innovation and Integration An Australian Case Study. Martinez. Agusti Cerrilo i. Abat. Pere Fabra i.
  70. Web site: McGlothlin Courtroom Center for Legal & Court Technology. www.legaltechcenter.net. 2016-02-05.
  71. Web site: Courtroom Technology: A Status Report. 2004. February 5, 2015. Lederer. Frederic I.. https://web.archive.org/web/20150912162413/http://www.legaltechcenter.net/download/articles/Courtroom%20Technology,%20A%20Status%20Report.pdf. September 12, 2015. dead.
  72. Web site: Discover the Cyberjustice Laboratory in 8 min.. March 8, 2015. Cyberjustice Laboratory.
  73. Web site: Software. February 5, 2015. Cyberjustice Laboratory. https://web.archive.org/web/20150107074748/http://www.cyberjustice.ca/en/software-presentation/. January 7, 2015. dead.
  74. Web site: Resources - ICANN. www.icann.org. 2016-02-05.
  75. An Analysis of the UDRP Experience - Is it time for reform?. Cortes Dieguez. Juan. 2008. Computer Law & Security Report. 24.
  76. Web site: Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. March 20, 2015. United Nations.
  77. Web site: Possible Future Work on Online Dispute Resolution in Cross-Border Electronic Commerce Transactions. March 20, 2015. United Nations, General Assembly.
  78. Web site: Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) on the work of its thirty-first session (New York, 9-13 February 2015). March 20, 2015. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Cyberjustice".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.