ПИЛОТНЫЕ  ПРОЕКТЫ  ОНЛАЙН  РАЗРЕШЕНИЯ  СПОРОВ  В  АНГЛИИ  И  ЗАКОН  «О  СУДЕБНОМ  ПЕРЕСМОТРЕ  И  СУДАХ»  2022  ГОДА

Elena Petrovna ERMAKOVA

doi:10.33184/pravgos-2023.1.16

Authors

Elena Petrovna ERMAKOVA Peoples' Friendship University of Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5722-3641

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2023.1.16

Keywords:

online dispute resolution, online court, English civil procedure, English Courts Act, Online Procedure Rules, access to justice

Abstract

The current task of the Russian legislature in developing new procedures for dispute resolution using modern technologies is to apply the latest experience of advanced foreign countries in this sphere. The UK is undoubtedly one of these countries. The UK’s experience in digitizing its own justice system and establishing an online court is the focus of this article. It analyzes the concept of online courts in the UK, various pilots in this field, as well as the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022, which enshrined a number of provisions regarding online procedures; it identifies some shortcomings of the concept of online procedure and pilot projects. Purpose: based on the analysis of pilot projects reports, regulations and scientific sources to form an idea of the formation and development of online dispute resolution (ODR) procedure in courts and tribunals of Great Britain. Methods: theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic; empirical methods of comparison, description, interpretation. Such specific scientific methods as legal-dogmatic and interpretation of legal norms are used. The study reveals that, against the background of austerity, justice in England and Wales is changing significantly through the use of technologies, which begs the question: are the fundamental principles of due process being lost in the pursuit of modernization and efficiency? The attempt to digitize the UK’s justice system involves the creation of an online court, the feature of which is mediation built into the procedure as part of dispute resolution. It is expected that the online court will become a mandatory forum for resolving cases within its jurisdiction and will initially deal with money disputes of up to £25,000. However, the issues of access to justice for all categories of citizens and the openness and transparency of justice have not yet been resolved.

Author Biography

Elena Petrovna ERMAKOVA , Peoples' Friendship University of Russia

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Assistant Professor of the Department of Civil Law and Procedure and International Private Law, Law Institute

References

Кудрявцева Е.В. Гражданское судопроизводство Англии / Е.В. Кудрявцева. – Москва : Городец, 2008. – 320 с.

Кузовков И.А. Теоретические проблемы апелляционного производства в судах Англии и Уэльса : дис. ... канд. юрид. наук : 12.00.15 / И.А. Кузовков. – Москва, 2006. – 205 с.

Katsh E. Online Dispute Resolution and Prevention: A Historical Overview / E. Katsh, O. Rabinovich-Einy. – DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190464585.003.0002 // Digital Justice: Technology and the Internet of Disputes. – New York, 2017. – P. 25–38.

Katsh E. Digital Justice: Technology and the Internet of Disputes / E. Katsh, O. Rabinovich-Einy. – DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190464585.001.0001. – New York, 2017. – 264 p.

The drive for virtual (online) courts and the failure to consider obligations to combat human trafficking – A short note of concern on identification, protection and privacy of victims / F. Gerry et al. – DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2018.06.002 // Computer Law & Security Review. – 2018. – Vol. 34, iss. 4. – P. 912–919.

Ермакова Е.П. Реформы гражданского судопроизводства, арбитража и медиации в зарубежных странах 2014-2018 гг. (Австралия, Англия, Германия, Канада, США, Франция) : монография / Е.П. Ермакова. – Москва : Инфотропик, 2018. – 192 с.

Rabinovich-Einy O. The Past, Present, and Future of Online Dispute Resolution / O. Rabinovich-Einy. – DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuab004 // Current Legal Problems. – 2021. – Vol. 74, iss. 1. – P. 125–148.

Sixsmith D. Falling at the First Hurdle? A Critical Analysis of HMCTS’s Implementation of Stage 1 of the Online Court / D. Sixsmith // Journal of Law, Technology and Trust. – 2022. – Vol. 3, iss. 1. URL: https://www.northumbriajournals.co.uk/index.php/jltt/article/view/1156.

Salim R. Quo vadis consumer dispute resolution? UK & EU cross border consumer dispute resolution in the post Brexit landscape / R. Salim. – DOI https://doi.org/10.37417/rivitsproc/684 // Revista Ítalo-española De Derecho Procesal. – 2022. – № 1. – P. 97–121.

Briggs M. The Civil Online Court in England / M. Briggs. – DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198850410.003.0007 // Principles, Procedure and Justice. – Oxford University Press, 2020. – Charter 7. – P. 63–198.

Mulcahy L. Exclusion in the interests of inclusion: who should stay offline in the emerging world of online justice? / L. Mulcahy, A. Tsalapatanis. – DOI 10.1080/09649069.2022.2136713 // Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. – 2022. – № 4. – P. 455–476.

Prince S. Encouragement of mediation in England and Wales has been futile: Is there now a role for online dispute resolution in settling low-value claims? / S. Prince. – DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552320000130 // International Journal of Law in Context. – 2020. – Vol. 16, iss. 2. – P. 181–196.

Etherton T. Rule-Making for a Digital Court Process / T. Etherton. – DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198863182.003.0003 // The Civil Procedure Rules at 20. – Oxford, 2020. – Charter 3. – P. 36–93.