欧盟法视角下的在线纠纷解决:odr的潜力是否得到充分发挥?

Pavel Loutocký
{"title":"欧盟法视角下的在线纠纷解决:odr的潜力是否得到充分发挥?","authors":"Pavel Loutocký","doi":"10.5817/MUJLT2016-1-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditional judicial mechanisms did not offer an adequate\nsolution for cross-border electronic commerce disputes.\nAlthough there has been expected great potential in solving\ndisputes online and the rise of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)\nuse, the assumptions has not been confirmed yet. Only a few\nexamples demonstrate the success stories of ODR, which is in\nbig contrast to the continuous growth of electronic\ntransactions and in general with the use of the online\nenvironment. The European Commission however understood the\npotential of ODR and it is trying to foster the use of it by\nadopting the ODR Regulation and the ADR Directive. Such legal\nframework has been developed to apply in consumer disputes\narising out of sales or providing services between an EU\nconsumer and an EU trader. The ADR Directive sets out basic\nstandards of ADR entities and processual rules under which it\nis possible to solve the dispute. Then under the ODR Regulation\nthe complainant will be able to submit a complaint using the\nODR platform. The complaint (and any related documentation)\nwill be submitted to the ODR platform via an electronic form.\nYet it is necessary to assess the risks of above mentioned\nlegal framework. One of the great concerns are connected with\npossible forum shopping while providers are registering as ADR\nentities. Experienced trader (unlike the consumer) is able to\nchoose ADR provider, which is more likely to decide in his\nfavour. Possible exclusion of online negotiation or even online\ntools in general is then further underlining possible concerns.\nThe paper will thus assess main legal aspects of ADR / ODR\nlegal framework of European Union Law and it will deal with\nmain problematic parts of it.","PeriodicalId":38294,"journal":{"name":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","volume":"10 1","pages":"113-127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Online Dispute Resolution to Resolve Consumer Disputes from theperspective of European Union Law: Is the Potential of ODRFully Used?\",\"authors\":\"Pavel Loutocký\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/MUJLT2016-1-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Traditional judicial mechanisms did not offer an adequate\\nsolution for cross-border electronic commerce disputes.\\nAlthough there has been expected great potential in solving\\ndisputes online and the rise of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)\\nuse, the assumptions has not been confirmed yet. Only a few\\nexamples demonstrate the success stories of ODR, which is in\\nbig contrast to the continuous growth of electronic\\ntransactions and in general with the use of the online\\nenvironment. The European Commission however understood the\\npotential of ODR and it is trying to foster the use of it by\\nadopting the ODR Regulation and the ADR Directive. Such legal\\nframework has been developed to apply in consumer disputes\\narising out of sales or providing services between an EU\\nconsumer and an EU trader. The ADR Directive sets out basic\\nstandards of ADR entities and processual rules under which it\\nis possible to solve the dispute. Then under the ODR Regulation\\nthe complainant will be able to submit a complaint using the\\nODR platform. The complaint (and any related documentation)\\nwill be submitted to the ODR platform via an electronic form.\\nYet it is necessary to assess the risks of above mentioned\\nlegal framework. One of the great concerns are connected with\\npossible forum shopping while providers are registering as ADR\\nentities. Experienced trader (unlike the consumer) is able to\\nchoose ADR provider, which is more likely to decide in his\\nfavour. Possible exclusion of online negotiation or even online\\ntools in general is then further underlining possible concerns.\\nThe paper will thus assess main legal aspects of ADR / ODR\\nlegal framework of European Union Law and it will deal with\\nmain problematic parts of it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"113-127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2016-1-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2016-1-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

传统的司法机制无法充分解决跨境电子商务纠纷。尽管人们一直期待在线解决纠纷的巨大潜力和在线争议解决(ODR)使用的兴起,但这些假设尚未得到证实。只有少数例子证明了ODR的成功故事,这与电子交易的持续增长以及总体上与在线环境的使用形成鲜明对比。然而,欧盟委员会了解ODR的潜力,并试图通过采用ODR法规和ADR指令来促进它的使用。这样的法律框架是为了适用于欧盟消费者和欧盟贸易商之间因销售或提供服务而产生的消费者纠纷。ADR指令规定了ADR实体的基本标准和可能解决争议的程序规则。然后,根据ODR法规,投诉人将能够使用ODR平台提交投诉。投诉(和任何相关文档)将通过电子表格提交到ODR平台。然而,有必要对上述法律框架的风险进行评估。其中一个很大的担忧是,当供应商注册为adtities时,可能会出现论坛购物。有经验的交易者(不像消费者)能够选择ADR提供商,后者更有可能做出对他有利的决定。可能排除在线谈判甚至一般的在线工具,这进一步强调了可能存在的问题。因此,本文将评估ADR / odreu法律框架的主要法律方面,并将处理其中的主要问题部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Online Dispute Resolution to Resolve Consumer Disputes from theperspective of European Union Law: Is the Potential of ODRFully Used?
Traditional judicial mechanisms did not offer an adequate solution for cross-border electronic commerce disputes. Although there has been expected great potential in solving disputes online and the rise of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) use, the assumptions has not been confirmed yet. Only a few examples demonstrate the success stories of ODR, which is in big contrast to the continuous growth of electronic transactions and in general with the use of the online environment. The European Commission however understood the potential of ODR and it is trying to foster the use of it by adopting the ODR Regulation and the ADR Directive. Such legal framework has been developed to apply in consumer disputes arising out of sales or providing services between an EU consumer and an EU trader. The ADR Directive sets out basic standards of ADR entities and processual rules under which it is possible to solve the dispute. Then under the ODR Regulation the complainant will be able to submit a complaint using the ODR platform. The complaint (and any related documentation) will be submitted to the ODR platform via an electronic form. Yet it is necessary to assess the risks of above mentioned legal framework. One of the great concerns are connected with possible forum shopping while providers are registering as ADR entities. Experienced trader (unlike the consumer) is able to choose ADR provider, which is more likely to decide in his favour. Possible exclusion of online negotiation or even online tools in general is then further underlining possible concerns. The paper will thus assess main legal aspects of ADR / ODR legal framework of European Union Law and it will deal with main problematic parts of it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
Addressing Evolving Digital Piracy Through Contributory Liability for Copyright Infringement: The Mobdro Case Study (Un)lock and (Un)loaded: Regulating 3D-Printed Firearms in the Open-source Era after the 2013 Hysteria Patent-Eligible Invention Requirement Under the European Patent Convention and its Implications on Creations Involving Artificial Intelligence Cybersecurity: Notorious, but Often Misused and Confused Terms How the Two Child Abuse Cases Helped to Shape the Test of Originality of Photographic Works
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1