Cross-border dispute resolution in Europe: looking for a new “normal”

Author:

Velicogna MarcoORCID

Abstract

We live in an increasingly digitally mediated, platform-based environment characterised by remote working, schooling, shopping, and socialising, where national borders blur and geographical location importance decreases. One of the main effects of this transformation is the growing relevance of cross-border (actual and potential) disputes and, therefore, the need for adequate means to address and resolve them. Geographically bounded forms of dispute resolution based on national justice systems, courts, and independent judges have shown their limits to face the new challenge. Building on Canguilhem’s work on the norm, normal and pathological concepts, the paper explores the European Union’s attempt to provide adequate cross-border dispute resolution mechanisms through traditional justice means, showing achieved results and limits. The paper then explores the increasing role of dispute resolution mechanisms integrated into platforms, such as Amazon, eBay and Booking, that bring together service-and-goods providers and buyers/users. These platforms 1) act as third parties in the adjudication of controversies and 2) deploy crowd-based adjudication and enforcement instruments.

Publisher

Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law

Subject

Law,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference52 articles.

1. Alleweldt, F., et al., 2009. Study on the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the European Union. Submitted by Civic Consulting of Consumer Policy Evaluation Consortium (CPEC) to DG SANCO [online]. Berlin: CPEC-Civic Consulting. Available from: http://www.civic-consulting.de/reports/adr_study.pdf [Accessed 5 April 2022].

2. Amato, R., and Velicogna, M., 2020. Encoding cross-border Judicial Cooperation in criminal matters: current practices and the rise of the eu e-Justice infrastructure. In: C. Billet and A. Turmo, eds., Coopération opérationnelle en droit pénal de l' Union européenne. Brussels: Bruylant, 189-218.

3. Bernard, C., 1947. Principes de médecine expérimentale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

4. Cadiet, L., Hess, B., and Isidro, M.R., eds., 2019. Privatising Dispute Resolution: Trends and Limits (Vol. 18). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

5. Canguilhem, G., 1991. The Normal and the Pathological. New York: Zone Books.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3