online dispute resolution sites assessed

115 and Counting: The State of ODR 2004

Melissa Conley Tyler

Program Manager, International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne

Abstract

This paper will present a survey of the current state of online dispute resolution (ODR) through an analysis of 115 ODR sites and services launched to date around the world. ODR refers to dispute resolution processes such as mediation, arbitration or adjudication assisted by information technology, particularly the internet. ODR can be used for both online and offline disputes.

The paper will present statistical information and trend analysis of the ODR sites identified, including services offered, communication methods used, type of disputes dealt with and trends in ODR.

Introduction

Most of the literature on online dispute resolution (ODR) to date has dealt in conjecture. By contrast, this paper takes an empirical approach by outlining developments in ODR since 1996, offering a portrait of the state of the field.

ODR refers to dispute resolution processes assisted by information technology, particularly the internet. This can include facilitative processes such as mediation, advisory processes such as case appraisal and determinative processes such as arbitration and adjudication. An outline of terminology used is included in the glossary in Appendix 1.

As of July 2004, at least 115 ODR services had been launched worldwide, settling more than 1.5 million disputes. ODR services offer examples of using technology to resolve everything from eBay disputes to commercial litigation; from family disputes to the Sri Lankan peace process. There are now ODR services in all regions.

The continuing growth of ODR, particularly in Europe and Asia and in courts and other institutions suggests that ODR will impact on dispute resolution practice and should be of interest to all conflict resolution practitioners.

Methodology

This paper updates research conducted for the Department of Justice Victoria in 2003 that identified 76 ODR sites and services worldwide (Conley Tyler and Bretherton 2003 summarised in Conley Tyler 2003). This original research was prepared using the following methodology:

Comprehensive literature review of 128 books, articles, reports and other resources on ODR, including review of previous site surveys (Center for

Law, Commerce & Technology 2000, Schultz et al 2001, Consumers In-ternational 2001, International Chamber of Commerce 2001)

Analysis of 76 ODR sites identified through internet indices and search engines, academic indices, informational sites and literature review

Liaison with ODR researchers and the expert community.

These results were then updated in May-June 2004 through the following:

Search of www.odr.info (list of ODR providers, ODR blog to June 2004) Review of ODR Library (Conley Tyler 2004) Review of Proceedings of Second Annual Forum on Online Dispute

Resolution (Katsh and Choi 2003) Review of Cyberweek 2004 conference discussions at www.odr.info and

Network Lawyers group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Network-Lawyers Google Search for “ODR” and “online dispute resolution” (first 100

entries) Contact with UN Expert Working Group on Online Dispute Resolution,

Site Committee organising the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution and confirmed speakers at the Third Annual Forum.1

ODR services identified and assessed in this paper are listed in Appendix 3.

State of the Art of ODR

Growth and Availability

ODR has been available since 1996. Its development can be defined as passing through three broad stages:

a "hobbyist" phase where individual enthusiasts started work on ODR, often without formal backing

an "experimental" phase where foundations and international bodies funded academics and non-profit organisations to run pilot programs

an "entrepreneurial" phase where a number of for-profit organisations launched private ODR sites (adapted from Katsh and Rifkin 2001:47-72).

The hobbyist phase lasted until around 1996 when the first four ODR services were launched. The experimental phase was around 1997-1998 and the entrepreneurial phase was marked by the many sites launched in 1999-2000.

Since 2001, ODR has been entering a fourth "institutional" phase where it is piloted and adopted by a range of official bodies including courts and other dispute resolution providers.

1 Thanks are due to the following who provided information used in compiling this report: Steve Abernethy, Colm Brannigan, Ned Courtney, Ben Davis, Richard Garnett, Sanjana Hattotuwa, Dr Li Hu, Arno Lodder, Martin Odams de Zylva, Claro Parlade, Pratamesh Popat, Graham Ross, Rosyzhou, Colin Rule, Rinaldo Sali, Dr Andrew Stranieri, Justice Brian Tamberlin, Berend de Vries, Mohamed Wahab, Elisabeth Wentworth and Russell Yardley. Trenel 2003 was instructive on German sites. Thanks also to Matthew Corrigan for research assistance and to Jan Jeworutzki and Sherman Chan for translation.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Network-Lawyers

http://www.odr.info/

Given the essentially experimental nature of this field, ODR services have proved surprisingly durable with the majority of services launched still operating.

Of the 115 sites identified, 82 appear to be operational, 30 are no longer providing services and three are unknown. However it should be noted that many of the sites that are nominally offering ODR do not appear to be highly active. Services that are no longer operating are marked in italic type in Appendix 3.

ODR sites and services have continued to be launched with 30 new sites or services established in 2003-2004. ODR sites not included in Conley Tyler 2003 are listed in Appendix 5.

Location

Most of the early activity in ODR took place in North America. However both Europe and Asia have now started to develop significant ODR initiatives.

These three regions account for almost all ODR activity, however there are two South American, one African and one multi-region ODR service.

The early-launched Cibertribunal (Peru) shows it is possible to offer ODR in a less developed context while the newer ChinaODR, TrustEnforce (South Africa) and Disputeresolution.ph (Philippines) are optimistic about extending ODR into these areas. See Appendix 4 for a list of ODR services by region and Wahab 2004 for a discussion of information and communications technology development factors and their impact on the development of ODR.

Types of ODR Offered

ODR has adapted standard dispute resolution processes for use online, including complaint handling, arbitration, mediation, facilitated negotiation and case appraisal. Each traditional ADR mechanism has an analogy online: for example iCourthouse offers mock trials using panels of volunteer jurors. A description of ADR processes is included in the glossary in Appendix 1.

In addition, a number of online-specific techniques have been developed to take advantage of the new technology; these include automated negotiation (without human intervention) and negotiation support (see Kersten 2004 and Bellucci; Zeleznikow 2004). Mediation support such as online document sharing is beginning to be offered. Collaborative peace-building tools are also starting to be developed online (Balvin 2004).

Mediation and arbitration have been the most prevalent forms of ODR. The breakdown of types of ODR among the 115 sites is as follows:

The communication tools used in ODR have changed as online technology has developed. Early ODR sites tended to rely mainly on email meaning that communication was delayed, text based and insecure. By contrast, the most common technology for services launched since 2001 is a secure web site encrypted by Secure Socket Layers (SSL) technology where parties are given a password to access a web site area dedicated to their dispute. See Appendix 1 for a description of online communication methods and their characteristics.

Sites can either allow asynchronous communication through threaded discussion (bulletin boards) or real time chat facilities. Instant messaging is being used by some sites, as is "secure email" via an encryption program. Caucusing (the ability for one party to meet among themselves or with the neutral without the other party) is a basic feature in newer systems. Some sites offer facilities such as case tracking and document editing.

A number of providers integrate ODR methods with traditional tools such as phone, fax, teleconference and face-to-face meetings. Videoconferencing is offered by a number of sites. Broadcast-quality videoconferencing is expensive, however lower quality videoconferencing is becoming more affordable and may be the next phase in technological development (NADRAC 2002).

Type of Disputes

The range of disputes resolved by ODR has been broad: from family law to internet domain name disputes; from consumer transactions to peace negotiations.

ODR has been used to resolve both “online disputes” arising through or because of online activity and “offline disputes” such as family, neighbourhood and employment disputes arising in the “real world”.

It is becoming more common for providers to offer services for both online or offline disputes. This includes some providers who launched exclusively dealing with online disputes. There have been cases where offline disputants have demanded that online methods be extended to them even when the provider had intended only to deal with online disputes (Rule 2002:222).

The areas of dispute handled fall into the following broad categories:

1. Consumer disputes2. Internet disputes, especially domain names3. Commercial, family, workplace and neighbourhood disputes4. Complex litigation5. Peace and conflict

Examples of services dealing with each area are given below.

e-Commerce and other Consumer Disputes

Given that the need to resolve online disputes was one of the key drivers for the development of ODR, it is not surprising that many sites were established mainly to resolve disputes arising through or because of online communication.

Consumer ODR tends to be provided as a service for consumers in a particular “marketplace” or those residing in a particular geographic area.

The largest provider in this area is Square Trade, a private U.S. company that offers facilitated negotiation and mediation of mainly online disputes, including

for the eBay, Google, Yahoo! and other online marketplaces. Square Trade now offers ODR for Californian Association of Realtors disputes.

Other examples of consumer ODR include:

ECODIR, the European Union’s prototype online consumer dispute resolution site

Online Confidence, an initiative of Eurochambres, the membership organisation of 1300 European chambers of commerce

NotGoodEnough.org, an Australian “gripes” site where disgruntled consumers can post complaints to be forwarded to the company involved

FSM, a German site that handles complaints about internet sites eCOGRA, a British site that provides ODR for users of online gaming.

Internet Disputes

ODR has also been adopted as a method for resolving disputes relating to internet addresses (“domain names”).

There have been five service providers approved under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999. These deal with disputes over the ownership and use of “.com”, “.org” and other high level domains:

Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution eResolution (no longer operating) National Arbitration Forum World Intellectual Property Organisation.

ODR is also offered for some national domain name disputes, such as:

Nominet (“.uk” domains) CIETAC Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (“.cn” domains) American Arbitration Association (“.us” domains)

Commercial, Family, Workplace and Neighbourhood Disputes

At the other end of the spectrum, ODR has been adopted for quintessentially “real world” disputes such as commercial, family, workplace and neighbourhood disputes. ODR is now being used in situations where face-to-face dispute resolution might have been possible but, for some reason, ODR is preferred.

Some providers offer ODR as a stand-alone facility. For example, U.K. company The Claim Room offers a series of “rooms” where dispute resolution practitioners can conduct mediations and other dispute resolution procedures. These can be “hired out” by practitioners in the same way as physical rooms.

Others integrate online communication into existing dispute resolution services. For example Family Mediation Canada provides web-broadcast teleconferencing and joint document collaboration facilities as a service to its members mediating family disputes (Brannigan 2004).

ODR is also being offered as a pro-active service, such as the International

Chamber of Commerce’s “Paction” which enables parties to prepare, negotiate and complete contacts for the international sale and purchase of goods online.

Some of the ODR services that assist in “real world” disputes focus on providing analytical rather than communication tools. For example Canadian company SmartSettle helps people prepare for negotiation by analysing their preferences and the potential options on the negotiation table while the Department of Justice Victoria’s disputeinfo service uses Acumentum’s Scenario Builder to guide disputants through the options for dealing with their dispute.

Complex Litigation

ODR is also being adopted by courts and tribunals seeking to improve access to justice and streamline the litigation process.

The Federal Court of Australia’s eCourt initiative enables electronic filing and document management and offers a “virtual courtroom”, including videoconferencing, particularly for Native Title hearings in remote areas (Tamberlin 2004).

An unusual example is Justica Sobre Rodas, a mobile court in Brazil that uses an artificial intelligence program to analyse witness statements and assessors’ reports to enable a Judge to hand down a decision at the scene of a vehicle accident.

Courts and tribunals in Singapore (e@dr), the United Kingdom (MoneyClaimOnline) and Ireland (Irish Commercial Court) have similarly adopted ODR for some of their processes. A U.S. experiment, the Michigan Cybercourt, remains under development.

LegalGrid Online has launched its Court21 product to assist courts and tribunals to incorporate ODR into their operations.

Peace and Conflict

Finally, online tools are being used to assist in peacebuilding and conflict resolution.

For example Info-Share brings the parties in the Sri Lankan peace process together electronically in a situation where it would be impossible for them to meet face-to-face. Its aim is to promote conflict transformation by knowledge-sharing, information and communications flow and offering shared spaces for stakeholder dialogue (Hattotuwa 2004).

The Cultures of Peace News Network (CPNN) works preventively to promote a culture of peace through a global network of sites created by UNESCO to enable people to exchange information on media and events (Balvin 2004).

What is striking about these results is the rapid growth of ODR and the variety of contexts and locations in which it is being adopted.

Case Statistics

There is very wide variability in the number of cases dealt with by ODR sites: from only one case to more than 1.5 million disputes.

Statistics on cases attracted were available for 31 of the sites surveyed (27%). Lack of information for the other sites makes it difficult to make comprehensive judgements (Consumers International 2001). While some sites that do not include this information may have attracted fewer cases (Schultz et al 2001), there are also other factors such as client confidentiality requirements that may prevent some providers from reporting on their results.

The sites that have handled the most disputes appear to be the following:

Square Trade: over 1.5 million cases handled Cybersettle: over 90,000 disputes handled iCourthouse: 11,094 cases filed World Intellectual Property Organisation: over 6,000 decisions administered National Arbitration Forum: 4,259 decisions listed TRUSTe: thousands of complaints clickNsettle, iLevel, SettleOnline and WebTrader: over 2,000 cases each Nominet: 1,614 cases resolved. FSM: over 1,179 complaints

Some of the online complaints handling services have had a large volume of complaints filed. BBBOnline had 1.3m complaints filed (but not handled) online in 2000 while NotGoodEnough.org had 3,000 complaints filed in its first day.

A further seven services have settled over 100 cases and another 10 have settled under 100 disputes. The least successful sites are The Virtual Magistrate and intelliCourt recording one case each. Some services, such as Internet Neutral, appear never to have handled a case.

The key to viability of an ODR service appears to be the quality of its referral sources. For example the majority of Square Trade’s cases have come directly from its link to the eBay site, the “place” where the disputes occurred. A number of incentives are built into the eBay system to encourage parties to resolve their disputes, including a buyer and seller ratings system and web seal program. Cybersettle has been the preferred provider for the Association of Trial Lawyers of America and the Canadian Bar Association.

There is less data on the settlement rates achieved by ODR services with only 18 sites including these statistics (including seven domain name arbitration services that publish case results on their sites). Other international surveys of ODR sites have been unable to gather significant data on this issue (Consumers International 2001; International Chamber of Commerce 2001).

The following settlement rates have been reported:

Word&Bond: 100% settlement rate WebAssured: over 95% success in complaints against member firms Square Trade: 85% of cases settled through facilitated negotiation, as well

as further cases settled through mediation and case appraisal IRIS Médiation: 53 of 61 mediations (87%) settled in its pilot year

Resolution Forum: 75% of cases successfully resolved SmartSettle: 80% settlement rate for real cases Bankers Repository Corporation: 60% settlement rate (5% annual variation) Nominet: 50% settled clickNsettle: 50% settled Online Ombuds Office: 50% settled USSettle.com: 40-50% success rate

This is broadly comparable to settlement rates for alternative dispute resolution generally which range from 50% to over 85% (NADRAC).

User satisfaction is rarely tracked; however one site that collects this information has positive data. 80% of Square Trade users say they would use the service again.

Funding

ODR sites have grown from a number of environments, including government and international bodies, academia, consumer organisations, business organisations and entrepreneurial start-up companies. They have been motivated by both business opportunities and a sense of social need.

ODR sites make use of a number of funding mechanisms including:

grant funding (such as the Online Ombuds Office) government funding (such as Singapore’s Dispute Manager service) user fees for one or both parties (such as Word&Bond) membership fees (such as Nova Forum) advertising revenue (such as Complain.com.au) subsidy from other services.

User fees have been the predominant funding mechanism for ODR. User fees can take a number of forms including:

a filing fee an hourly rate for mediators', arbitrators' and evaluators' time an administration fee or online "room" rental a standard service fee, usually for a set number of hours a percentage of settlement reached a per round bidding fee (automated negotiation only).

A number of services have offered ODR for no cost, usually on a pilot basis while they were supported through philanthropic or University funding. These services have tended to cease once the initial funding was exhausted.

Government ODR services have offered at least a pilot phase with reduced or no user fees (eg ECODIR) or, where services are associated with a court, have applied the same filing fees as for a standard court process (eg e@dr).

A number of sites which provide both online and offline services have chosen to have the same fee structure for both.

Overall, experience suggests that early claims about cost savings should not be

overstated for ODR as a whole. While some techniques such as automated negotiation and facilitated negotiation can be delivered at a very low cost, others such as mediation remain time intensive for the neutral involved. ODR is not inevitably a low cost option but may offer cost savings in many cases.

Access

There are three issues that may limit use of ODR services:

access to a computer with minimum hardware and software support accessibility of sites to people with disabilities and slow connection speeds language of services offered.

Access to Hardware and Software

Most of the sites surveyed assume that disputants have access to basic computing infrastructure. However some providers who use videoconferencing make this equipment available to parties (for example JAMS and clickNsettle).

The U.S. government Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is an interesting example of incorporating access to equipment into its service: FMCS brings laptops and other mobile technology to the workplace to help conciliate labour/management disputes (Rule 2002:179-181). Skilled facilitators are also provided to help parties make use of the equipment.

Accessibility for People with Disabilities

Accessibility for those with computer equipment may be a more important issue and is something that can be completely managed by ODR system design. NADRAC 2002 suggests that ODR systems should use appropriate and accessible bandwidth, low requirements for computer capacity and should comply with guidelines for disability standards (NADRAC 2002).

Most early ODR sites meet these criteria; however many more recent sites employ programming that does not appear to comply with disability standards. For example, Flash is increasingly used to enable moving elements; however a number of sites do give the option of a non-Flash version.

Languages Offered

Language and culture can both be bars to use of ODR. Primerano 2004 dis-cusses the impact of language on usability while Rao 2004 discusses the impli-cations of differences of culture in the virtual world.

The breadth of languages used to provide ODR services is improving, admit-tedly from a low base. In Conley Tyler 2003, 61 of the 76 sites identified (80%) offered their services in only one language, 53 in English only (70%).

English remains the most common languages for ODR services, followed by Spanish, French and German. ODR services are offered in 20 languages, including Greek, Russian, Sinhala, Tamil, Irish, Norwegian and Icelandic.

A single language service is still the most common model (74%).However there are an increasing number of bilingual (15%) or multilingual services (11%).

Some consumer ODR sites offer services across a number of states in each of-ficial language, such as the consumer association consortium WebTrader or Eurochambres’ Online Confidence service. Among the most interesting of these are econsumer.gov (where consumers can lodge a complaint online which is accessible to government law enforcement in 13 countries) and CCForm (where a consumer submits a complaint in his or her own language which is automati-cally translated into the language of the company involved).

Other services such as Scenario Builder offer a dispute resolution tool that can be populated with content in any language desired.

Privacy and security

Privacy and security are issues in an online environment as they are for traditional dispute resolution services. Bonnet et al 2002 suggest that ODR systems must be able to meet the following minimum security standards:

identifies the author of each message shows evidence that documents have been completely sent ensures the integrity of submitted information protects information stored on a database from unauthorised parties distinguishes an original from a copy.

ODR technology is definitely coming closer to this point (Bonnet et al 2002, Hornle 2003). However no communication method can provide for absolute security. Security is always a question of risk management.

Much of the early resistance to ODR probably came from the fact that email is not secure. The conventional wisdom is that unencrypted email is about as secure as a postcard (Schultz et al 2001). While encryption options such as S/MIME and Pretty Good Privacy exist, these are not in general use. One estimate is that only 0.5% of email is encrypted in any way (Rule 2002:246).

However, probably because of this, email is not the main communication method used by modern ODR systems. Most systems instead allow parties to communicate on a secure web page or platform. The most common mechanism is Secure Sockets Layer (SSL): this is indicated by a website beginning with "https" or lock symbol on the user's screen. Some systems use encrypted email.

Like any other sites, ODR sites are also at risk of virus infections, intrusions or disk crashes. Firewalls, backup policies and intrusion detection systems are the standard mechanisms used to reduce these risks (Schultz et al 2001). Modern ODR sites appear to make use of these mechanisms.

In line with increasing privacy regulation worldwide, most ODR sites have explicit policies on privacy that tell users what use can be made of their personal information. Some sites delete all information on a case from their database once settlement has been reached (Bankers Repository Corporation) while others can store it in case of the disputant losing data (Intersettle).

Policies and procedures

Most ODR sites have formal policies and procedures, including dispute management protocols, privacy and confidentiality policies, standards of conduct and codes of practice.

Almost all sites explicitly state a set of procedures for handling disputes. These can be as formal as an arbitration procedures manual or as simple as a flow chart. However, none of the ODR systems publicised a dispute handling mechanism if procedures were not followed (Consumers International 2001).

A number of the sites surveyed explicitly bind their online mediators, arbitrators and evaluators to a set of rules for conduct such as:

rules of the American Bar Association (ABA) American Arbitration Association (AAA) Code of Ethics ethical standards of the Association for Conflict Resolution (formerly the So-

ciety for Professionals in Dispute Resolution) Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators the Institute for Responsible Dispute Resolution Code of Ethics in house standards of conduct.

The American Bar Association established a task force to look at ways of ensuring that ODR services remain effective and ethical (Rule 2002:116). The Online Sector of the Association for Conflict Management prepared Proposed Guidelines for Online Dispute Resolution (Wiener 2001:4). In Australia, NADRAC 2002 provides draft practitioner standards for ODR and the Department of Justice Victoria has commissioned a study into accreditation of ODR practitioners (Conley Tyler, Bornstein and Bretherton 2004).

Future of ODR

As these case statistics show, ODR tools are being used by an increasing number of people to resolve their disputes.

ODR can be a convenient, quick, low-cost option. For some disputes, such as low-value, cross-border internet transactions, there is no other option to resolve them: parties are not likely to fly around the world for an online auction that went wrong. In other cases, the choice can be because of costs, time or inclination. Sometimes people in dispute simply prefer not to meet. Technology can be particularly useful where parties would be in physical danger if they came together, such as in hostile conflict situations.

A needs assessment of a broad cross-section of citizens conducted in Victoria, Australia in 2003 using surveys and focus groups found that more than 70% of respondents were willing to try ODR to settle a dispute (Conley Tyler, Bretherton and Bastian 2003). The main factors influencing this choice were cost, speed and convenience.

However there were a group that were resistant to online technology. This would be predicted by an analysis of factors such as age, culture, disability and income identified by Sourdin 2004 as factors impacting on the use of technology. This suggests that ODR is a valuable additional service, but should not completely replace existing dispute resolution methods.

A study in Canada (Hammond 2003) found that disputants who experienced ODR had positive responses: 80% of disputants who were exposed to ODR found that they had no trouble expressing their ideas, concerns and issues online and they were confident that the other participants understood them. 82% said they had no difficulty expressing their emotions online.

This suggest that a major bar to the growth of ODR may be disputants’ lack of knowledge of the availability of various forms of dispute resolution rather than any lack of demand or previous negative experiences. Ross 2004 suggests this may be a major factor accounting for business reluctance to adopt ODR.

At the same time, sophisticated analyses of the behaviour of disputants highlight the role of corporate cultural barriers in considering dispute resolution alternatives (Opie 2004) and suggest reasons why demand for ADR does not necessarily translate into use of services (Barendrecht and de Vries 2004). Accreditation of ODR practitioners arguably has a role in building trust and confidence (Conley Tyler and Bornstein 2004). Further analysis of why parties choose to use or not use ODR is an area that deserves further research.

Conclusion

With 115 sites worldwide, ODR is no longer conjecture. In fact, ODR has the potential to become a major part of dispute resolution practice worldwide.

Comparing the results in this paper with Conley Tyler 2003 a number of trends in ODR can be identified:

1. Growth in Europe and Asia2. Growth in developing countries3. Growth in institutional contexts, especially in Courts and other justice

institutions4. Growth within some service providers as they extend their services to

new markets5. Growth of ODR in languages other than English

If these trends continue, particularly the adoption of ODR by traditional dispute resolution institutions such as courts, ODR will become an important part of dispute resolution practice. Government and justice institutions have a particularly important role in encouraging the adoption of technology through their adoption of technology and its associated demonstration effect.

The increasing integration of online technology into dispute resolution practice suggests that in time ODR may no longer be seen as a separate field of endeavour: it will be seen as dispute resolution using particular tools.

In the meantime, ODR will remain relevant to those involved in dispute resolution, law, e-commerce, industry, information technology and government.

Appendix 1Glossary of Terms

ODR is the term used in this paper for dispute resolution processes conducted with the assistance of communications and information technology, particularly the internet. Similar terms are “online ADR”, "eADR", "iADR", "virtual ADR", "cyber mediation" and "cyber arbitration." Simply providing information about ADR on a website is not ODR.

ADR refers to processes other than judicial determination in which an impartial person assists those in a dispute to resolve the issues between them (NADRAC 1997). Processes can be determinative, advisory or facilitative.

The main determinative process is Arbitration: a process in which the parties to a dispute present arguments and evidence to a neutral third party who makes a determination (NADRAC 1997). The arbitration judgment is binding on parties.

Advisory ADR processes include expert appraisal, case appraisal, case presentation, mock trial and neutral evaluation. In each process, an ADR practitioner considers and appraises the dispute and provides advice as to the facts, law and possible outcomes. Case Appraisal in this paper refers to all of these processes.

Facilitative processes include Conciliation, Mediation and Facilitated Negotiation: in each case the parties to a dispute, with the assistance of a neutral third party, identify the issues in dispute, develop options, consider alternatives and endeavour to reach an agreement (NADRAC 1997). Complaint Handling is a facilitative process where a party can make a complaint to a third party who will communicate a demand for redress to the respondent, usually for consumer disputes. It may or may not include the power to make a non-binding decision.

Online is a colloquial term that refers to communication through an electronic medium, especially the internet. The Internet is a global network of computers that exchanges data and communication messages. Online communication includes:

Email - a virtually instantaneous transfer of mainly text messages Instant Messaging - a variant on email that allows synchronous online chat Online Chat - a synchronous, text-based exchange of information Threaded Discussion (also known as bulletin boards) - an asynchronous,

textual exchange of information organised into specific topics Video/Audio Streams - asynchronous transfer of recorded messages Videoconferencing - synchronous transfer of video information.

Online Disputes are any disputes that arise through or because of online communication methods. For example, a dispute between a consumer and a website that sells products online, or between a buyer and a seller over an internet auction. Offline Disputes are any disputes that arise in the "real world" outside of cyberspace. These include family disputes, neighbourhood disputes and employment disputes.

Appendix 2References

Balvin, Nikola (2004). “The Cultures of Peace News Network : Is there Room for Peace Building in ODR?” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoBarendrecht, Maurits and de Vries, Berend (2004). “Fitting the Forum to the Fuss with Sticky Defaults: Failure on the Market for Dispute Resolution Services?” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoBellucci, Emilia and Zeleznikow, John (2004). “Trade-off Manipulations in the Development of Negotiation Decision Support Systems” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.info Bonnet, V., Boudaoud, K., Gagnebin, M, Harms, J. and Schultz, T. (2002). Online Dispute Resolution Systems as Web Services. Proceedings of Hewlett-Packard OpenView University Association Workshop, June 11-12 2002. Available www.online-adr.org/publications.htmBrannigan, Colm (2004). “Beyond E-Commerce: Expanding the Potential of Online Dispute Resolution”, Interaction, March 2004, 15-17.Center for Law, Commerce & Technology (2000). Online Alternative Dispute Resolution: An Issues Primer. Prepared for the National Association of Attorneys General. Center for Law, Commerce & Technology at the University of Washington School of Law. Available at http://www.law.washington.edu/lct/resources/index.htmlConley Tyler, Melissa, “Seventy-six and Counting: An Analysis of ODR Sites” (2003) in Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds), Online Dispute Resolution: Technology as the “Fourth Party”. Proceedings of the UNECE Second Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. UNECE. Center for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution, University of Massachusetts. Available www.odr.info Conley Tyler, Melissa (Ed.) (2004), ODR Library/Resource Database, www.odr.info, launched 24 February 2004Conley Tyler, Melissa and Bornstein, Jackie (2004). “Accreditation of Online Dispute Resolution Practitioners” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoConley Tyler, Melissa, Bornstein, Jackie and Bretherton, Di (2004), Accreditation of Online ADR Practitioners: An Options Paper. Prepared for the Department of Justice, Victoria. International Conflict Resolution Centre. Conley Tyler, Melissa and Bretherton, Di, Research into Online Alternative




http://www.law.washington.edu/lct/resources/index.html

http://www.online-adr.org/publications.htm




Dispute Resolution: Exploration Report (2003). Prepared for the Department of Justice, Victoria. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne. Available www.justice.vic.gov.au, www.psych.unimelb.edu.au/icrc Conley Tyler, Melissa, Bretherton, Di and Bastian, Brock (2003). Research into Online Alternative Dispute Resolution: Needs Assessment. Prepared for the Department of Justice Victoria. International Conflict Resolution Centre,. Available www.justice.vic.gov.au, www.psych.unimelb.edu.au/icrc Consumers International (2001). Disputes in Cyberspace 2001: Update of online dispute resolution for consumers in cross-border disputes. Consumers International Office for Developed and Transition Economies. www.consumersinternational.orgHammond, Anne-Marie (2003). "How Do You Write 'Yes'? A Study on the Effectiveness of Online Dispute Resolution." Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Volume 20, No. 3, September 2003Hattotuwa, Sanjana Yajitha (2004). “Untying the Gordian Knot: ICT for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding “ in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoHornle, Julia (2003). “Online Dispute Resolution – More Than The Emperor's New Clothes” in Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds), Online Dispute Resolution: Technology as the “Fourth Party”. Proceedings of the UNECE Second Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. Available www.odr.info International Chamber of Commerce (2002). Business-to-Consumer and Consumer-to-Consumer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Inventory Project. Summary Report. 14 May 2002. Available www.iccwbo.org.Katsh, Ethan and Rifkin, Janet (2001). Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace. Jossey-Bass.Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds) (2003). Online Dispute Resolution: Technology as the “Fourth Party”. Proceedings of the UNECE Second Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. Center for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution, University of Massachusetts. Available www.odr.infoKersten, Gregory E. (2004). “E-negotiation Systems : Interaction of People and Technologies to Resolve Conflicts” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoNADRAC (unknown). Summary of Research into ADR Effectiveness (internal document) cited in Mack, Kathy (2003), Court Referral to ADR: Criteria and Research. Australian Institute of Judicial Administration and National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory CouncilNADRAC (1997). Alternative Dispute Resolution Definitions. National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council. Available www.nadrac.gov.au.NADRAC (2001). Online ADR: Background Paper. January 2001. National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council. Available www.nadrac.gov.au.NADRAC (2002). Dispute Resolution and Information Technology: Principles for Good Practice (Draft). National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council.



http://www.iccwbo.org/



http://www.consumersinternational.org/

http://www.psych.unimelb.edu.au/icrc

http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/

http://www.psych.unimelb.edu.au/icrc

http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/

March 2002. Available www.nadrac.gov.au.Opie, Elisabeth (2004). “The Economics of ADR: is ODR the Next Efficiency?” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoPrimerano, Francesca (2004). “Multicultural Australia, Information Technology and Online Dispute Resolution” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoRao, Sharanya (2004). “The Cultural Vacuum in Online Dispute Resolution” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoRoss, Graham (2004). “Online Dispute Resolution and Business” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.infoRule, Colin (2002). Online Dispute Resolution for Business: For ECommerce, B2B, Consumer, Employment, Insurance, and Other Commercial Conflicts. Jossey-Bass.Schultz, Thomas, Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle, Langer, Dirk and Bonnet, Vincent (2001). Online Dispute Resolution: The State of the Art and the Issues. December 2001. Available www.online-adr.org/publications.htmSourdin, Tania (2004). “ODR – An Australian Perspective on the Digital Divide” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.info Tamberlin, Justice Brian (2004). “Online Dispute Resolution and the Courts” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.info Trenel, Matthias (2003). Links Online-Mediation. Available http://www.wz-berlin.de/online-mediation/buch/links.htmWahab, Mohamed (2004). “Online Dispute Resolution and Digital Inclusion: Challenging the Global Digital Divide” in Conley Tyler, Melissa, Katsh, Ethan and Choi, Daewon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution. International Conflict Resolution Centre in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. www.odr.info Wiener, Alan (2001). Regulations and Standards for Online Dispute Resolution: A Primer for Policymakers and Stakeholders. ODR News, February 15, 2001. All electronic resources listed are current as of 4 August 2004.


http://www.wz-berlin.de/online-mediation/buch/links.htm

http://www.wz-berlin.de/online-mediation/buch/links.htm



http://www.online-adr.org/publications.htm





Appendix 3ODR Services Assessed

Sites that are no longer active as of 4 July 2004 are indicated in italic type:

1. 1-2-3 Settle 2. ADRonline3. AllSettle4. American Arbitration Association 5. Ameritrade6. Arbitraje y Mediación (ARyME)7. Arbitronline8. Asian Domain Name Dispute

Resolution Centre9. Bankers Repository Corporation10.Better Business Bureau Online11.Camera Arbitrale di Milano12.CCForm13.Chartered Institute of Arbitrators14.ChinaODR15.CIETAC Domain Name Dispute

Resolution Centre16.Cibertribunal Peruano17.ClaimChoice 18.Claim Resolver19.clickNsettle20.Complain.com.au21.Concilia On-line22.Conciliazione On-Line23.Consenseo24.Consumers Association of Iceland25.CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution26.Cultures of Peace News Network27.Cybercourt28.Cyberlaws.net29.Cybersettle30.CyberTribunal31.Dispute Manager32.Disputeresolution.ph33.e@dr34.e-ADR35.ECODIR36.eCOGRA37.e-consens38.econsumer.gov39.emediation.nl40.e-Mediator 41.eNeutral42.eResolution 43.e-Settle.co.uk44.European Advertising Standards Alliance45.Family Mediation Canada

46.Federal Court of Australia eCourt47.Federal Mediation and Conciliation

Service48.FSM49.Global Arbitration Mediation Association50.Hong Kong International Arbitration

Centre 51. iCourthouse52. iLevel53. Info-Share54. InfoTech Dispute Resolution Center55. IntelliCOURT56. International Chamber of Commerce

Paction57. InternetNeutral58. Internet Ombudsmann 59. Internet Ombudsmannen 60. Intersettle61. IRIS Médiation 62. Irish Commercial Court63. IRS Electronic Account Resolution64.JAMS65.Justica Sobre Rodas66.LegalGrid Online67.Mediate.com68.Mediate-net69.Mediation America 70.Mediation Arbitration Resolution

Services 71.Mediationline72.Michigan Cybercourt73.Money Claim Online74.NASD75.National Arbitration Forum76.National Mediation 77.New Court City 78.Nominet79.NotGoodEnough.org80.Nova Forum81.Ombudsmann.de82.Online Confidence83.Online Ombuds Office84.Online Public Disputes85.Online Resolution86.PayPal87.Private Judge88.Resolution Canada

89.Resolution Forum90.Resolve It Now91.Retail Tenancy Unit NSW92.Scenario Builder93.SettlementNOW94.Settlement Online95.SettleOnline96.SettleSmart97.SettleTheCase98.SmartSettle99.Sopra Mediation100. Square Trade101. SwiftCourt102. The Claim Room

103. The Hearing Room104. The Virtual Magistrate105. Thuiswinkel.org106. TRUSTe107. TrustEnforce108. USSettle.com109. WebAssured110. WEBdispute111. WebMediate112. Web Trader113. WeCanSettle 114. Word&Bond115. World Intellectual Property

Organisation

The following sites reported to offer ODR were no longer operating in June 2004 and there was insufficient description of their services to enable them to be included: BeachFire eCaveat.com ecomplaints.com EZResolve from LaborMate labormate.com MyClaim.com OnlineDisputes, Inc.

Online Mediators Rent-a-Court.com Self-settle.com Settlex Ugetheard.com Web Dispute Resolutions

No ODR services were located at the following sites:

A Commercial Initiative for Dispute Resolution

Baddealings.com (no conciliation) Centre for Dispute Resolution Comptel (no dispute resolution service) Cybercourt.de (information only) disputeinfo (information and guidance) GMWK (information, including video) MediationNow (listings only)

Netherlands Arbitration Institute Netkey (software system) ODR.nl (research project) Trust UK (provides information on other

schemes) Trusted Shops (guarantee only) Virtual Mediator at Key Law Zeno (software system)

The following prototype/research systems do not offer services to the public:

DISCUSS (Daniel Paez, University of Melbourne) Family_Winner (Bellucci and Zeleznikow 2004) Negoisst (Electronic Negotiation Group)

The following initiatives were planned for launch in 2004:

www.odrmalaysia.com (contact [email protected]) DeMars Associates/Better Business Bureau/eBay joint program (contact

Colin Rule [email protected]) eRulemaking facility (contact Claro Parlade [email protected])

mailto:[email protected]



http://www.odrmalaysia.com/

Appendix 4ODR Services Assessed By Region

Asia and the Pacific (16)ADRonline www.adronline.com.auAsian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre www.adndrc.orgChinaODR www.odr.com.cnCIETAC Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre www.cietac.org.cnComplain.com.au www.complain.com.auDispute Manager www.disputemanager.comDisputeresolution.ph www.disputeresolution.phe@dr www.e-adr.org.sgFederal Court of Australia eCourt www.fedcourt.gov.auHong Kong International Arbitration Centre www.hkiac.orgInfo-Share www.info-share.orgNotGoodEnough.org www.notgoodenough.orgRetail Tenancy Unit NSW www.retailtenancy.nsw.gov.auScenario Builder www.acumentum.comSwiftCourt www.swiftcourt.orgThe Hearing Room www.auscript.com.au

Europe (38)Arbitraje y Mediación (ARyME) www.aryme.comArbitronline www.arbitronline.itCamera Arbitrale di Milano www.camera-arbitrale.comCCForm www.complaintsplatform.comChartered Institute of Arbitrators www.arbitrators.orgConcilia On-line www.fi.camcom.itConciliazione On-Line conciliazione.an.camcom.itConsenseo www.consenseo.comConsumers Association of Iceland www.ns.isCybercourt www.cybercourt.orge-ADR www.sgoa.orgECODIR www.ecodir.orgeCOGRA www.ecogra.come-consens www.e-consens.deemediation.nl www.emediation.nle-Mediator www.consensusmediation.co.uke-Settle.co.uk www.e-settle.co.ukEuropean Advertising Standards Alliance www.easa-alliance.orgFSM www.fsm.deInternational Chamber of Commerce Paction www.iccwbo.orgInternet Ombudsman www.internetombudsmann.atInternet Ombudsman www.internetombudsmannen.seIntersettle www.intersettle.co.ukIRIS Médiation www.iris.sgdg.org/mediationIrish Commercial Court www.courts.ieLegalGrid Online www.courtroom21.netMediationline www.mediationline.deMoney Claim Online www.courtservice.gov.uk/mcol

Nominet www.nominet.org.ukOmbudsmann.de www.ombudsmann.deOnline Confidence www.onlineconfidence.orgSopra Mediation www.sopra-mediation.deThe Claim Room www.theclaimroom.comThuiswinkel.org www.thuiswinkel.orgWeb Trader whichwebtrader.which.netWeCanSettle www.wecansettle.comWord&Bond www.wordandbond.comWorld Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) www.wipo.int

North America (57)1-2-3 Settle www.123Settle.comAllSettle www.allsettle.comAmerican Arbitration Association Web File www.adr.orgAmeritrade www.ameritrade.comBankers Repository Corporation www.thebrc.comBetter Business Bureau Online www.bbbonline.orgClaimChoice www.claimchoice.comClaim Resolver www.claimresolver.comclickNsettle www.clicknsettle.comCPR Institute for Dispute Resolution www.cpradr.orgCyberlaws.net www.cyberarbitration.comCybersettle www.cybersettle.comCyberTribunal www.cybertribunal.orgeconsumer.gov www.econsumer.goveNeutral www.eneutral.comeResolution www.eresolution.caFamily Mediation Canada www.fmc.caFederal Mediation and Conciliation Service www.fmcs.govGlobal Arbitration Mediation Association www.gama.comiCourthouse www.i-courthouse.comiLevel www.ilevel.comInfoTech Dispute Resolution Center www.infotechdispute.comIntelliCOURT www.intellicourt.comInternetNeutral www.internetneutral.comIRS Electronic Account Resolution www.irs.govJAMS www.jamsadr.comMediate.com www.mediate.comMediate-net www.mediate-net.orgMediation America www.mediationamerica.comMediation Arbitration Resolution Services www.resolvemydispute.comMichigan Cybercourt www.michigancybercourt.netNASD www.nasdadr.comNational Arbitration Forum www.arbitration-forum.comNational Mediation www.nationalmediation.comNew Court City www.newcourtcity.comNova Forum www.novaforum.comOnline Ombuds Office www.ombuds.orgOnline Public Disputes www.publicdisputes.orgOnline Resolution www.onlineresolution.comPayPal www.paypal.com

Private Judge www.privatejudge.comResolution Canada www.resolutioncanada.caResolution Forum www.resolutionforum.orgResolve It Now www.resolveitnow.comSettlementNOW www.settlementnow.comSettlement Online www.settlementonline.comSettleOnline www.settleonline.comSettleSmart www.settlesmart.comSettleTheCase www.settlethecase.comSmartSettle www.smartsettle.comSquare Trade www.squaretrade.comThe Virtual Magistrate www.vmag.orgTRUSTe www.truste.orgUSSettle.com www.ussettle.comWebAssured www.webassured.comWEBdispute www.webdispute.comWebMediate www.webmediate.com

South America (2)Cibertribunal Peruano www.cibertribunalperuano.orgJustica Sobre Rodas www.tj.es.gov.br

Africa (1)TrustEnforce www.trustenforce.org

Global (1)Cultures of Peace News Network www.cpnn.org

Appendix 5New ODR Sites

The following sites assessed in this paper were not included in Conley Tyler 2003 and Conley Tyler and Bretherton 2003:

1. Ameritrade www.ameritrade.com2. Arbitronline www.arbitronline.it3. CCForm www.complaintsplatform.com4. ChinaODR www.odr.com.cn5. CIETAC www.cietac.org.cn6. Concilia On-line www.fi.camcom.it7. Conciliazione On-Line conciliazione.an.camcom.it8. Consenseo www.consenseo.com9. Cultures of Peace News Network www.cpnn.org10.Disputeresolution.ph Not yet available11.e-ADR www.sgoa.org12.eCOGRA www.ecogra.com13.e-consens www.e-consens.de14.econsumer.gov www.econsumer.gov15.emediation.nl www.emediation.nl16.Family Mediation Canada www.fmc.ca17.Federal Court of Australia eCourt www.fedcourt.gov.au18.Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service www.fmcs.gov19.Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre www.hkiac.org20. Info-Share www.info-share.org21. InfoTech Dispute Resolution Center www.infotechdispute.com22. International Chamber of Commerce Paction www.iccwbo.org23. Irish Commercial Court www.courts.ie24. IRS Electronic Account Resolution www.irs.gov25.Justica Sobre Rodas www.tj.es.gov.br26.LegalGrid Online www.courtroom21.net27.Mediate.com www.mediate.com28.Mediationline www.mediationline.de29.Money Claim Online www.courtservice.gov.uk/mcol30.NASD www.nasdadr.com31.National Mediation www.nationalmediation.com32.Nominet www.nominet.org.uk33.Ombudsmann.de www.ombudsmann.de34.PayPal www.paypal.com35.Scenario Builder www.acumentum.com36.Sopra Mediation www.sopra-mediation.de37.SwiftCourt No longer operating38.Thuiswinkel.org www.thuiswinkel.org39.TrustEnforce www.trustenforce.org

Appendix 6Analysis of Online Dispute Resolution Services Alphabetical

Name of Provider1-2-3 Settle

Other names123 Settle

LocationU.S.A.

Year Established1999

Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate attorneys

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Facilitated Negotiation, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodEmail, web page, fax, telephonePrivacy/Security MeasuresEmail is "confidential"

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureAutomated Negotiation: US$200 totalMediation (3 days): US$600 totalArbitration/Appraisal: US$600 totalGreater fees depending on complexity

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo statistics provided

CommentsIt is no longer possible to use the system for dispute resolution without prior contact. However the 123Settle program is available for purchase or license.

Name of ProviderADRonline

Other namesSettlement Online Systems, Mediate Online, Adjudicate Online

LocationAustralia


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersLawyers Margot McKay and Bernadette Murray

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Mediation and ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, secure email, telephone support, online conferencing, teleconferencing, videoconferencing, secure chat room, instant messaging, fax, face-to-face meetingsPrivacy/Security MeasuresEncrypted email; secure web page

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial disputes, especially insurance claims and e-commerce disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureNo information provided. Licensing arrangements may be considered but the site is not currently available to the public.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information provided

Comments

The site involves much scrolling to navigate. There is no evidence of any activity since launch. No fees are listed and no information on cases handled is included. It appears that the automated negotiation system Settlement Online Systems is no longer being offered - however links to this page have not been updated.The program also offers an ADRonline trustmark symbol for online merchants. There is no information available on the take up rate for this service.The service was publicised to the ADR community to encourage mediators to join a panel but it may not have been well marketed to more generally. There were no agreed referral sources prior to launch although discussions with the Law Society of NSW appear to have taken place.

Name of ProviderAllSettle

Other namesSettlementNOW

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodWeb pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresWeb site is secure

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithInsurance claims

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$200 from insurance company on settlement

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesAs of October 2001, between 100 and 1000 cases had been filed.

CommentsThe web site states that AllSettle is not providing services at this time. AllSettle appears to have taken over SettlementNOW between 2000 and 2001

Name of ProviderAmerican Arbitration Association WebFile

Other namesAAA Online Services

LocationU.S.A.

Year EstablishedApprox 2001

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersAmerican Arbitration Association

ADR Services Arbitration (online filing, electronic voting, neutrals eCentre, online training)Communication MethodOnline filing, email, web page, message boardPrivacy/Security Measures128-bit SSL encryption; VeriSign secure site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes, other disputes. Offers conciliation and arbitration of dispute claims in No-Fault Insurance in New York. Consumer disputes cannot be filed online

LanguagesEnglish

Fee Structure Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates

Filing fee as per fee calculator. There may be additional fees.

No information provided

CommentsThe service offers online filing, payment and case management (including transfering documents, selecting neutrals, accessing rules and procedures and checking the status of a case). Arbitration is not offered online. AAA has 34 offices nationwide. Neutrals must abide by the Associations' code of ethics. The Association will provide dispute resolution services for .US domain disputes under the United States Dispute Resolution Procedure (usDRP) launched 2002.

Name of ProviderAmeritrade

Other namesAnswerbox, @nswerbox

LocationU.S.A, Canada


Still OperatingUnknown

Owners/FundersPrivate online sharebroker, Ameritrade

ADR Services Complaints handlingCommunication MethodWeb pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site with extensive privacy and security policies on site. Privacy Monitor logo displayed.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline trading disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUnknown


CommentsAnswerbox is accessible to clients through Trade Accountant feature. Site available to non-clients does not include any information on dispute resolution procedures: it thus appears that Ameritrade does not promote this highly as an investor service. There may be a change in services following merger with competitor.

Name of ProviderArbitraje y Mediación (ARyME)

Other names LocationSpain


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate venture

ADR Services Arbitration, MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, caucus roomsPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithBusiness disputes

LanguagesSpanish, English

Fee StructureStandard fees plus additional fee for online room

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesUnknown

CommentsARyME is still active as a provider of information, analysis and documentation

of national and international ADR. However it is no longer providing online case administration (previously offered in conjunction with U.S. provider Online Resolution).

Name of ProviderArbitronline

Other names LocationItaly


Still Operating

Yes

Owners/FundersConsorzio Poliedra (a training centre of the Milan Polytechnic), Studio Legale Abbatescianni e Associati and Atlantidee Srl

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, document exchange, case managementPrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword protected site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt With.it domain names

LanguagesItalian. Site also in English.

Fee StructureFrom €880 for one name/one panelist to €3,470 for three names and panelists. Additional €210-460 per name.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesList of decisions provided on site.

CommentsRules of procedure are provided on the site.

Name of ProviderAsian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC)

Other names LocationChina, Hong Kong


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersChina International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) and the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing (also fax and post)Privacy/Security MeasuresDecisions published on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes

LanguagesLanguage of the registration agreement. Site in Chinese and English.

Fee StructureBetween US$1,000 for a one-member panel for a single domain name to US$7,000 for a three-member panel for 10 domain names or more


CommentsOne of the five approved dispute resolution service providers for domain

name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999. Two offices: one in Beijing and one in Hong Kong.

Name of ProviderBankers Repository Corporation

Other namesBRC

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersBankers Repository Corporation

ADR Services Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, fax, mailPrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword protection on web site. Privacy and confidentiality policies.All information deleted following settlement of dispute.

Any Technical NotesUses Macromedia Flash

Type of Disputes Dealt WithCommercial disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$150 per party <US$50,000 up to US$850 per party <US$450,000paid on settlement only

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information available on number of cases. Report approximately 60% settlement rate.

CommentsAppraisal is undertaken by a three person committee and recommendation is delivered within 3-8 working days. Parties can monitor progress through online activity report. Well presented intuitive site with excellent learning support.

Name of ProviderBetter Business Bureau Online

Other namesBBB Online

LocationU.S.A., Canada


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersMembership organisation

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing only. Dispute resolution is handled by nearest available BBB office via face-to-face ADR techniques such as conciliation, mediation and arbitration. Privacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureBusiness membership fees

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates2000: 1,371,000 complaints filed online

CommentsAlthough BBB was planning to offer automated negotiation and online mediation and arbitration (Consumers International 2001, Schultz et al 2001) this has not yet eventuated. BBB Online offers reliability and privacy seals for businesses.

Name of ProviderCamera Arbitrale di Milano

Other namesRisolvi Online

LocationItaly

Year Established Still Operating Owners/Funders

Approx 2002 Yes Chamber of National and International Arbitration of Milan, Chamber of Commerce of Milan

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, email, chatPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure web site. Privacy policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll commercial disputes, especially arising out of the Internet environment

LanguagesItalian

Fee StructureProportional to the value of the dispute: €25 per party for disputes up to €500 up to €3000 for disputes over €250,000

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates16 cases settled, 2 not settled and 2 underway. 43 requests for online mediation refused by defendant.

CommentsThe site is well designed and easy to navigate. It is possible to lodge an inquiry as well as lodge a claim.The Chamber of National and International Arbitration of Milan has developed the "Risolvi Online" system used on the site as proprietary software. The www.risolvionline.com address also leads to this site.

Name of ProviderCCForm

Other namesConsumer Complaint Form

LocationBelgium


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFederation of European Direct Marketing (FEDMA) plus partners from the U.K., Belgium, France and Luxembourg

ADR Services Facilitated negotiation via multilingual complaint form

Communication MethodWeb page. Document attachments can be attached to the formPrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy policy on site. Committee of surveillance monitors operation of site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer complaints

LanguagesGerman, Greek, English, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Finnish, Swedish, Danish

Fee StructureFree


CommentsConsumers can address their complaints to any company. If the company is already registered, the complaint is directly transmitted. If not, the company is contacted. If facilitated negotiation is not successful, the case proceeds to traditional ADR (information on ADR is provided on the site). A

demonstration is available on site.A rare example of an ODR site that offers services in a range of languages. The consumer fills in the form in his or her own language and it is automatically translated into the company’s language.

Name of ProviderChartered Institute of Arbitrators

Other names LocationU.K.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNot-for-profit charity

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, case monitoringPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer and commercial disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureNo additional fee for online filing


CommentsActs as an online filing portal for a number of schemes including: Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) Independent Arbitration

Scheme for the Travel Industry Construction Adjudication Scheme Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme

Once filed, disputes are then handled through traditional ADR processes. In 2003 an Independent Dispute Resolution Service for Purchasers from Ford Journey was also offered but no information was available in 2004. In the future, the site will also be a portal for EEJ-Net, a project of the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

Name of ProviderChinaODR

Other namesodr.com.cn, Online Dispute Resolution Centre of China

LocationChina

Year EstablishedJune 2004

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersDeofar Inc.

ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Negotiation/ConciliationCommunication MethodEmail, chatroom, BBS, video conferencing and offline facilitiesPrivacy/Security MeasuresAll disclosed and exchanged information will be stored in “Case File” webpage, which is secured by passwords.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithMainly online disputes, especially e-commerce

LanguagesChinese and English. Site currently available in Chinese only but English section is planned.

Fee StructureFrequent users can become

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesCurrently being launched

members of ChinaODR. Services are free for members if the subject matter of the case is $500 or lower.For non-members of ChinaODR, initial services are free of charge, but at the later stage the fee is: (1) $50 per case or(2) 5% of the subject matter.The time limit for settlement is 2 hours. Any further time is charged at an hourly rate of $50 per hour CommentsThe site provides full Negotiation Rules and Mediation Rules and a list of mediators. Other services include online notarization and online lawyer witness services. Deofar was also responsible for the chinaeclaw.com initiative, China’s first expert electronic commerce law website established in July 2000.

Name of ProviderCibertribunal Peruano

Other names LocationPeru


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNon-profit organisation

ADR Services Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodEmail, Chat, Videoconferencing, IP TelephonePrivacy/Security MeasuresEncryption

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDisputes relating to the internet (e-commerce, intellectual property, consumer protection and privacy)

LanguagesSpanish, English

Fee StructureFrom USD100 for disputes <USD1,000 to USD1,300 for >USD50,000


CommentsA welcome example of a site from outside the developed world. A code of conduct for mediators and arbitrators is included on the site. A schedule of fees has now been added.

Name of ProviderCIETAC Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre

Other namesCIETAC

LocationChina


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersChina International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC)

ADR Services Arbitration Communication MethodElectronic filing and document transfer, email, post, fax

Privacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDisputes relating to .cn domain names and keywords managed by the China Internet Network Information Center

LanguagesChinese. Site also in English.

Fee StructureFrom RMB3,000 for one panelist for one domain name to RMB13,000 for three panelists for >10 names

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates144 .cn domain names and 14 keyword disputes. Case statistics available on site.

CommentsCIETAC deals with .cn domain name disputes in addition to its involvement in the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre joint initiative with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre.

Name of ProviderClaimChoice

Other names LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FunderseLegius Inc.

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodCase filing, web pagePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithInsurance disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee Structure5% of settlement, if reached, to a maximum of US$500


CommentsWeb site no longer available.

Name of ProviderClaim Resolver

Other namesClaim Negotiator

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersErnst & Young

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, MediationCommunication MethodBlind bidding, web page, videoconferencing

Privacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithInsurance disputes over US$1000 in dispute

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$35 filing fee plus US$250 settlement fee for <US$10,000 or US$350 settlement fee for > $10,000


CommentsWeb site no longer available.

Name of ProviderclickNsettle

Other namesNational Arbitration and Mediation

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersSubsidiary of National Arbitration and Mediation, a national provider of ADR services and software

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodInteractive web site, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, mainly financial

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$15 submission fee. US$10, US$15 then US$20 per offer/demandUS$100 settlement fee each if <US$10,000. US$200 settlement fee each if >US$10,000

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesBy August 2001, the site had handled 2000 cases of which 50% were successfully settled. About 50% of all parties offered the online option choose to resolve their dispute via computer. Of those cases, about 45% settled online.

CommentsAutomated negotiation is no longer offered. However, the site offers mediation and arbitration remotely as well as face-to-face. Videoconferencing is offered through installation of equipment at client offices.

Name of ProviderComplain.com.au

Other names LocationAustralia


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersConsumetrix International Pty Ltd

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree for consumers

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNone to date

CommentsThe site planned to provide a searchable database of company contact points for submitting complaints and then allow consumers to file an online complaint which would then be conciliated. The site advertised prior to launch in 2003 but was no longer operating in 2004.

Name of ProviderConcilia On-line

Other namesFlorence Chamber of Commerce

LocationItaly


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersCamera di Commercio di Firenze

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodWebpage, chatroomPrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword-secured area. Privacy assured.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithBusiness/business and business/consumer disputes

LanguagesItalian. Site also has some information in English, French and German.

Fee StructureNo information provided


CommentsThe Chamber of Commerce also provides face-to-face mediation (conciliazione) and arbitration. It guarantees conclusion of cases within 45 days. Parties email to initiate a case.

Name of ProviderConciliazione On-Line

Other names LocationItaly


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersAncona Chamber of Commerce

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodWebpage, chatroom, audiconference, videoconferencePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure web page. Absolute privacy guaranteed

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll types of economic/commercial disputes, including business to business, business consumer and internet service provider disputes

LanguagesItalian

Fee StructureSchedule of fees provided on site. Fees are proportional to the initial demand and can be paid by credit card online


CommentsThe Chamber offers traditional mediation (conciliazione) as well as online. Rules of mediation are provided on the site.

Name of ProviderConsenseo

Other namese-mediation.de

LocationGermany


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersConsenseo mediation process consultants

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodMediation software incorporating “modern communication material”


Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithBusiness disputes

LanguagesGerman

Fee StructureNot provided

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot provided

CommentsVery attractive site with Flash introduction. Also provides face-to-face business mediation and process design. www. e-mediation.de also accesses this site.

Name of ProviderConsumers Association of Iceland

Other names LocationIceland


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersIndependent membership organisation

ADR Services Complaint Handling, Facilitated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes


LanguagesIcelandic

Fee StructureConsumer membership fees (around 15,000 individuals from a national population of 28,000)


CommentsThis service was identified by the International Chamber of Commerce 2002:4.

Name of ProviderCPR Institute for Dispute Resolution

Other namesCenter for Public Resources

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersAn alliance of 500 lawyers and corporate counsel

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, email

Privacy/Security MeasuresDecisions published on site

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureBetween US$2,000 for a one-member panel for a single domain name to US$6,000 for a three-member panel for 5 domain names

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates

CommentsOne of the five approved dispute resolution service providers for domain name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy

http://www.e-mediation.de/

(UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999. Also provides traditional mediation and arbitration services with a roster of more than 700 neutrals. The CPR Institute is a membership organisation of global corporations, leading law firms, legal academics and selected public institutions.

Name of ProviderCultures of Peace News Network

Other namesCPNN

LocationAustralia, Russia, U.S.A., Japan and China


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersUNESCO with the assistance of the International Conflict Resolution Centre at the University of Melbourne

ADR Services Information exchange, collaborationCommunication MethodWebpage, email, chatPrivacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithPreventive conflict resolution focused on building a culture of peace

LanguagesEnglish, Chinese, Japanese and Russian

Fee StructureFree

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot applicable. Postings on sites vary over time

CommentsCPNN is a global network of interactive internet sites for information exchange on events and media productions that promote a culture of peace. It was launched as part of the 2001-2010 International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World. CPNN USA also moderates a Middle East discussion.

Name of ProviderCybercourt

Other names LocationGermany


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate Consortium

ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration Communication MethodEmail, teleconferencing


Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline disputes

LanguagesGerman

Fee StructureCase by case basis


CommentsWas intended to be offered in pilot phase from March- September 2000 by

Securitas Internet Systems AG, e-com GmbH, data business services GmbH & Co KG and Heuking Kühn Lüer Heussen Wojtek. It is not clear whether this ever occurred (Schultz et al 2001). The pilot was then transferred to PriceWaterhouseCoopers. No further action appears to have been taken.

Name of ProviderCyberlaws.net

Other namesCyberarbitration

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersNo information provided

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, face-to-face hearing if desiredPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish



CommentsOnline arbitration appears not to be the main focus of Cyberlaws.net's consultancy services. Parties must email for further information. The site was apparently more active in the past offering arbitration for online disputes (Center for Law, Commerce and Technology 2000) so it is possible that the original enterprise failed and the www.cyberarbitration.com address was registered by a new organisation. The current site has a focus on cyberlaw in India but does not offer ODR.

Name of ProviderCybersettle

Other names LocationU.S.A., Canada, U.K.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web site, email, fax, phone help linePrivacy/Security Measures128-bit SSL encryption; individualised passwords; replication server

Any Technical NotesCybersettle has patent protected its computerised dispute resolution system in th U.S.A. and 13 other countries

Type of Disputes Dealt WithProperty and casualty insurance, all financial

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureInsurance officers pay: US$25 submission, US$125 engagement feeUS$150 on settlement <US$10,000US$250 on settlement >US$10,000Attorneys pay:US$100 on settlement <US$5,000US$150 on settlement <US$10,000

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesHandled over 90,000 disputes and facilitated over US$600 million in settlements. The largest case settled online was for $12.5m.Case volume increased 23% in 2002.A 2000 Accenture study mentioned on the site found that Cybersettle reduces the average time it takes to settle a case

US$200 on settlement >US$10,000 by as much as 4-6 months.CommentsCybersettle been sufficiently successful that it now also operates in the U.K. It promotes itself as the world leader in accelerated dispute resolution.The secret of Cybersettle's success may be its referral sources: eg it is the Association of Trial Lawyers of America’s "official and exclusive online settlement tool." (It appears that Cybersettle is no longer endorsed by the Canadian Bar Association). Cybersettle promotes itself at legal conferences and has a marketing director.Fees have reduced over time, presumably as case volume has grown.Since June 2002 Cybersettle has had a strategic alliance with Resolute Systems Inc., a leading international mediation, arbitration and consulting firm, to provide customers with further settlement options. When parties fail to settle a claim through the Cybersettle process, RSI provides them with the option of a neutral telephone facilitator or traditional face-to-face mediation/arbitration services. In August 2002, Cybersettle formed a strategic alliance with e-Autoclaims Inc., a business services company that provides the insurance industry with claims management services.

Name of ProviderCyberTribunal

Other names LocationCanada


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersUniversity of Montreal

ADR Services Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodUnknownPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesFrench, English, Spanish


Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesIn three years of operations, over a hundred disputes were settled.

CommentsA pilot project that ended in December 1999. The main initiator went on to establish eResolution.org.

Name of ProviderDispute Manager

Other names LocationSingapore


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersDeveloped by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) and its subsidiary Singapore Mediation Centre (SMC) with the support of the Ministry of Law, Singapore

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Mediation, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, chat, online drafting facilities

Privacy/Security MeasuresSecure storage of information

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial disputes, domain name disputes, other disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureMediations with one mediator are charged at S$900 per party per day for disputes <S$250,000 up to S$2,400 per party per day for disputes <S$1m plus a flat S$250 administrative fee.Evaluation attracts an administrative fee of S$500-$2,500 plus evaluator's time at S$200-$1,000 per hourAutomated negotiation: S$10 filing plus S$10 per party for the first 3 rounds and S$40 for final 2 rounds.


CommentsAn easy to navigate site with clear descriptions of the various online ADR processes, including guidance for selecting appropriate procedures.Online techniques can be supplemented with face-to-face meetings if desired.

Name of ProviderDisputeresolution.ph

Other names LocationPhilippines

Year EstablishedSeptember 2004

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersDeveloped by the Cyberspace Policy Center for Asia-Pacific for the Philippine Dispute Resolution Centre

ADR Services Automated negotiation (Web-based; SMS-based), online mediation, online arbitration, neutral evaluationCommunication MethodWeb-mail, virtual room, instant messaging, video-conference, fax, SMSPrivacy/Security MeasuresUse of site requires prior registration and bulk of site is password protected

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFranchise, e-commerce and consumer

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree for one year


CommentsOperations to commence September 2004. Although the Cyberspace Policy Center for Asia-Pacific will administer the service during the pilot phase, the institution offering the service to the public will be the Philippine Dispute Resolution Center, through its newly-created ODR committee. An eRulemaking facility for the Philippine National Telecommunications Commission is also under development and plans to launch in November 2004.

Name of Providere@dr

Other names LocationSingapore


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersSingapore Subordinate Courts in partnership with the Ministry of Law, the Singapore Mediation Centre, Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the Trade Development Board and the Singapore Economic Development Board

ADR Services Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, email (including document exchange)Privacy/Security MeasuresSecure website and database. Privacy and confidentiality rules.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, especially those arising from e-commerce transactions

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureMediation by a judge-mediator or court mediator is free. If referred to the Small Claims Tribunal, standard costs apply at claims S$10 for claims by consumers below S$5,000 to S$600 for claims by business up to S$20,000.Mediation and arbitration by Singapore Mediation Centre or Singapore International Arbitration Centre is at the same cost as a face-to-face process


CommentsDepending on the size of the matter, the online mediator will be from the Small Claims Tribunal, a Court Mediator or a Judge-Mediator panel from the official judical system. Parties can also opt for a mediator or arbitrator from the Singapore Mediation Centre or Singapore International Arbitration Centre. Face-to-face services are also provided

Name of Providere-ADR

Other namesSGOA

LocationNetherlands


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersStichting Geschillenplosing Automatisering (Foundation for Settlement of Automation Disputes)

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodWebpage, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresRules provided on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt With Languages

Disputes <€2,500, mainly information and communication technology

Services appear to be provided in Dutch only. Site provides information in Dutch, English, French and German.

Fee StructureParties bear own costs


CommentsSGOA also offers face-to-face mediation, arbitration and expert advice to information and communications technology companies. SGOA handled over 200 caes worth more than €68m between 1991 and 2001.e-ADR was launched to provide a low cost system for smaller claims. Timeliness is a focus with deadlines and a target of reaching settlement within one month.

Name of ProviderECODIR

Other namesElectronic Consumer Dispute Resolution

LocationIreland


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersEuropean Commission

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Mediation, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site

Any Technical NotesThawte secure site


LanguagesEnglish, French

Fee StructureFree during pilot stage


CommentsA pilot project of the European Commission using technology developed by eResolution.

Name of ProvidereCOGRA



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersE-commerce and Online Gaming Regulation and Assurance (eCOGRA)

ADR Services Complaints handlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline gaming disputes

LanguagesEnglish



CommentseCOGRA is an independent entity that aims to provide consumer protection to users of online gaming on the internet. It is a membership organisation

for online gaming software makers and suppliers. eCOGRA offers a seal of approval and complaint handling (“queries and complaints will be promptly responded to”)

Name of Providere-consens

Other nameswww.e-consens.de

LocationGermany


Still OperatingYes

Owners/Funderse-consens GmbH

ADR Services Facilitated negotiation, mediation (software and training), mediation supportCommunication MethodEmail intake, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy policy provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline purchases, family dispute, workplace, inheritance

LanguagesGerman

Fee StructureNegotiation €12.50 or 10% of value per party. Mediation €25 per 15 mins of mediator’s time shared between parties

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot yet enough cases to estimate

Commentse-consens specialise in online conflict management and intercultural dispute resolution. e-consens provides four services: consulting services and crisis intervention software for mediators and complaints handling training workshops in online conflict and intercultural mediation ODR servicesInformation is provided on online mediation on the site.

Name of Providereconsumer.gov

Other nameseconsumer ADR pilot

LocationU.S.A.

Year Established2001 (pilot Oct 2003)

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFederal Trade Commission

ADR Services Complaints handling, intakeCommunication MethodPublic website for complaints, password protected site for government coordinationPrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy policy on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline consumer disputes relating to foreign countries

LanguagesEnglish, Spanish, German, French and Korean

Fee StructureFree


CommentsThis is a project to enhance coordinated consumer protection across 13 countries. Consumers can lodge a complaint online which is then accessible to the government law enforcement and regulatory agencies in ICPEN member countries. Governments can communicate with each other online

through the protected area of the site. As part of a six month pilot project, consumers may now choose to refer their complaint to an ADR provider through the site. Referral agencies include Square Trade.

Name of Provideremediation.nl

Other namesODR.nl

LocationNetherlands


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersLawyer ECM Roelvink, partner with De Haan Advocaten

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodWeb pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure web page. Before commencing, parties sign agreement including confidentiality terms

Any Technical NotesFlash intro

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, national or international

LanguagesSite in Dutch and English. Suggests that may be able to provide support for disputes in other languages

Fee StructureC175 per hour split between parties

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information provided. Some test sessions have taken place

CommentsSite provides good information on the mediation process but less information on emediation.nl’s services, such as qualifications of mediators.

Name of Providere-Mediator

Other namesCybersolve

LocationUK


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersConsensus Mediation led by solicitor Maggie Kennedy

ADR Services Mediation, InformationCommunication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresEncrypted email

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline or offline disputes where amount in dispute <£15,000

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureCost generally half the cost of face-to-face mediation. Minimum £200 +VAT per party.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesDuring 2000, the service managed a caseload of 30 disputes.

CommentsA relatively simple online mediation system. Consensus Mediation also provide traditional ADR services and provide useful information and resources on ADR on the site. No information is available on the site on the number of cases settled

Name of ProvidereNeutral



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate venture of attorneys and mediators

ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithCommercial disputes

LanguagesSite is in English

Fee Structure$250 per hour per party for the first 2 hours. $200 every hour after.


CommentsVideoconferencing was the primary communication method used. Parties who did not have their own videoconferencing facilities were referred to videoconferencing providers. No longer operating.

Name of ProvidereResolution

Other namesDisputes.org

LocationCanada


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate venture led by Karim Benyeklef, University of Montreal

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, secure site, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresDecisions are published on the site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes, other disputes

LanguagesEnglish, French, Spanish

Fee StructureUS$750-US$3,500 depending on panel and number of domain names in dispute

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesIn domain name disputes, eResolution found for complainants approximately 60% of the time (compared to National Arbitration Forum and WIPO at 80%) (Rule 2002). The caseload to October 2001 was 300 cases

CommentsOne of the five approved dispute resolution service providers for domain name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999. eResolution also had a partnership with the Paris Chamber of Commerce and Industry's Centre of Mediation and Arbitration and RealNames Corporation to arbitrate Keyword Web address disputes.eResolution was a mourned loss to the online ADR community following the dot com crash and September 11 shock to the stockmarket which apparently led to the withdrawal of private investors (Rule 2002). eResolution was considered to be a leader in building online dispute systems and created the

architecture for the ECODIR system. eResolution's services may still be available for design assistance.

Name of ProvidereSettle.co.uk

Other namese-Settle

LocationU.K.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersJudicium Limited

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site (128-bit SSL encryption), password protection. Terms and conditions available

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial disputes, mainly insurance

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree for claimants. Fees for defendants by negotiation.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesFirst case settled in April 2001

CommentsThe site explains the process clearly and has good information on security issues. No information is provided on volume of cases attracted.

Name of ProviderEuropean Advertising Standards Alliance

Other namesEASA

LocationBelgium


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersMembers are regulatory bodies and advertising industry associations

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filingPrivacy/Security MeasuresCase results reported on website

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer disputes regarding advertising

LanguagesFrench, English

Fee StructureNo fee for complaints


CommentsEASA handles cross-border complaints on advertising. The site refers complaints to the self-regulatory body in the country of residence; however, if that body does not accept online complaints, a complaint can be submitted which will then be forwarded to the relevant body.

Name of ProviderFamily Mediation Canada



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFamily Mediation Canada, a membership organisation

ADR Services Mediation support

Communication MethodWebpage, web-broadcast teleconferencing and document-sharing collaboration toolsPrivacy/Security MeasuresPractitioner accounts are protected

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOffline disputes, especially family


Fee StructurePractitioners are billed for services and they then re-bill clients or absorb costs

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot applicable

CommentsFamily Mediation Canada provides its services to individual mediators who can book time slots for client conferences as desired at an hourly rate.

Name of ProviderFederal Court of Australia eCourt

Other nameseCourt

LocationAustralia


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFederal Court of Australia

ADR Services Adjudication, MediationCommunication MethodWebpage, electronic filing, electronic hearings/virtual courtroom, case management and document management systems, videoconferencing facilitiesPrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword protection to log-in to site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithLitigious disputes, especially those involving parties in remote locations or a large volume of documentary material

LanguagesEnglish (with translation services)

Fee StructureSame filing fees as for other Federal Court cases. It has been suggested that fees should be waived to encourage parties to use the technology


CommentsThe Federal Court of Australia has been a world leader in embracing new technologies, for example in using wireless laptop technology in courtrooms and using videoconferencing.eCourt is currently used to hear preliminary (interlocutory) matters and give directions and other orders. It could also be used for Court-supported mediation. It is particularly useful to meet the demands of the Court’s Native Title jurisdiction that necessitates hearings with Indigenous communities in remote locations.

Name of ProviderFederal Mediation and Conciliation Service

Other namesTAGS system

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFederal Mediation and Conciliation Service (Federal Government). TAGS software provided by Facilitate.com

ADR Services Mediation, Facilitated NegotiationCommunication MethodWebpage, laptops, projectorsPrivacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical NotesNetwork of internet services, mobile computers, LCD projectors and customized software. FMS has eight TAGS-enabled electronic customer centres around the U.S.

Type of Disputes Dealt WithLabour-management disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureMostly free (Federal government provided)


CommentsTAGS can be used in face-to-face meetings or via the internet by FMCS mediators. It provides group facilities for online collaboration and mediation. Collaboration tools allow participants to simultaneously contribute ideas via computer, build on others’ ideas and offer new ideas with complete anonymity. Consensus building tools are available, including tools to prioritise ideas, conduct electronic “ballots” and view results. Software provides the opportunity to assign tasks and implement timelines.Mediation is conducted with laptops and projectors supplementing face to face negotiations (either with one computer for each party or for all participants). There is also the facility for online meetings via the internet.FMCS has an international program offering training and consulting to foreign nations. This does not appear to have included the TAGS system to date.

Name of ProviderFSM



Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Complaint Handling, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, web sitePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithComplaints about internet sites, especially illegality and child protection issues

LanguagesGerman

Fee StructureNone for complaints

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates1179 complaints were received in 2001

CommentsIf the complaint lodged is for a foreign server, it is passed on to an appropriate body in that country. If the complaint relates to a German site, the complaint is

passed on to the organisation and, if no action is taken, a complaint committee makes a decision which is then published. FSM may also sue a non-complying company in court. Anonymous complaints are accepted.FSM is a membership organisation of internet related organisations. 300 companies have agreed to abide by FSM's code of conduct.

Name of ProviderGlobal Arbitration Mediation Association

Other namesGAMA

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Referral onlyCommunication MethodWeb page, videoPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAny disputes

LanguagesEnglish, Spanish

Fee StructureUS$100 for a basic searchUS$150 for an advanced search


CommentsThe site contains E-Directories of ADR professionals designed to help disputants find mediators and arbitrators appropriate for resolving their conflicts by permitting searches of the database by years of ADR experience, education, credentials, subject matter expertise, associations, geographic location, videoconferencing compatibility and hourly rate. It does not offer direct ODR services but some of its members may. Services in Spanish are provided through the affiliated Ordenpublico site. GAMA claims to be the first ADR company on the web in 1995.

Name of ProviderHong Kong International Arbitration Centre

Other namesHKIAC, .cn/.hk domain name dispute resolution

LocationHong Kong


Still OperatingYes

Owners/Funders

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing (also fax and post)Privacy/Security MeasuresDecisions published on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes (.hk and .cn).

LanguagesSite in English and Chinese

Fee StructureBetween HK$8,000 per domain name for a one-member panel to HK$16,000 for a three-member panel.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesFor .hk domain names, 11 cases are listed June 2001-March 2004 with one pending, eight decided and two withdrawn. For .cn domain names there are 13 cases: three pending, one withdrawn and nine resolved.

Comments

HKIAC provides dispute resolution services for the .hk and .cn domains in addition to HKIAC's partnership with the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) to operate the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC), one of the four domain name dispute resolution providers approved by the Internet Corporation for the Assignment of Names and Numbers (ICANN) to provide dispute resolution services for general top level domain names.

Name of ProvideriCourthouse

Other namesI-Courthouse, JurySmart

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Case Appraisal, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, email

Privacy/Security MeasuresPassword protected site. Privacy policy in place. No cookies are used.Users can choose between private confidential decisions and public decisions which are posted on the site.Cases may not use real names or addresses

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructurePeer juries are free. Private panels cost US$189 including a report breaking down juror responses demographically

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesUp to Case No. 11,094 filed (June 2004)

CommentsThis is an example of the adaptation of a dispute resolution process for the online environment: while mock-trials exist outside cyberspace, the internet allows easier recruitment of jury members and presentation of material. Where parties agree to make the outcome binding, the service operates as arbitration. Otherwise, parties are free to seek further redress in a court.Case materials must be submitted within 72 hours and the defendant has 10 days to register. Jurors then read and review the entire contents of each parties' trial book. Jurors may ask questions of the parties.Prices for the private panel service have dropped dramatically since 2001 perhaps implying that the site is attracting a greater volume of cases.

Name of ProvideriLevel



Still OperatingNo


ADR Services Complaint Handling, Facilitated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

If complaint not settled, all information is made public on websiteType of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer disputes, particularly online consumer disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureYearly membership fee. Consumers must become members to file a complaint. Companies cannot become members.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesAs of October 2001, the service had handled thousands of disputes (Schultz 2001)

CommentsiLevel is no longer offering online dispute resolution. The iLevel.com address has been acquired by Ultimate Search Inc.Once a complaint was filed, iLevel contacted the company involved and encouraged the parties to engage in direct negotiation. If no settlement was reached within 30 days, the complaint and record of negotiations was made public on the iLevel site.

Name of ProviderInfo-Share

Other names LocationSri Lanka


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersAcademy for Educational Development and USAID

ADR Services Conflict resolution/transformation including knowledge-sharing, information and communications flow and “shared spaces” for stakeholder dialogue.Communication MethodGroove Workspace and related online technologies, including websites, bulletin boards, private chat roomsPrivacy/Security MeasuresUS Department of Defense certified software platform

Any Technical NotesRuns only on Windows at present, though a Mac OS X version is planned

Type of Disputes Dealt WithEthno-political conflict, peace processes, donor coordination, civil society coordination

LanguagesEnglish, Sinhala, Tamil

Fee StructureNo fee to users

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot applicable. Currently being used in the Sri Lankan peace process

CommentsInfo-Share was created with the belief that ICT and innovative media can help bridge communications gaps between the main stakeholders in the Sri Lankan peace process and also enable public participation in the process. As such, it can be seen as a harbinger of the application of traditional conflict resolution and mediation theories to the world of information technology - a marriage between virtual information sharing and real world change.

Name of ProviderInfoTech Dispute Resolution Center



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersEscrowTech

ADR Services Mediation, Neutral Assessment, ArbitrationCommunication MethodUnknown. International disputes are specifically mentioned as a focus but no information is provided on how mediation is conductedPrivacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithLegal disputes relating to software, computers, information technology, intellectual property and e-commerce

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureMediation/arbitration at $300 per hour plus $1895 administration fee


CommentsInformative and attractively designed site. InfoTech also provides IT testing services (eg evaluation and verification of software and IT assets) and damages analysis in its IT testing lab in Lindon, Utah.Only one mediator/arbitrator biography provided.

Name of ProviderIntelliCOURT



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate company ArbitrationSolutions

ADR Services Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodUnknownPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithNo limitations listed

LanguagesEnglish


Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesOnly one case listed on the site

CommentsIntelliCOURT closed in December 2002. Its model was for mediation and arbitration by an experienced, retired judge.

Name of ProviderInternational Chamber of Commerce Paction

Other namesICC, Paction

LocationFrance


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersInternational Chamber of Commerce. System built by Allagraf Ltd

ADR Services Online negotiation, conline contractingCommunication MethodWebpagePrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword protected. Privacy

Any Technical NotesIncorporates online signing including

statement on site digital IDType of Disputes Dealt WithInternational trade negotiations

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureGBP75 to register. Each contact costs GBP10 per party


CommentsPaction enables parties to prepare, negotiate and complete contacts for the international sale and purchase of goods online based on the ICC’s model international sale contract. The ICC provides arbitration and traditional dispute resolution services but does not yet offer these online.

Name of ProviderInternetNeutral



Still OperatingNo


ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, instant messaging, chat, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security MeasuresNon-secure. Mediators follow Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators. Detailed rules of procedure provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline commercial disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$250 fee each for submission and response. US$1-US$6 per minute for mediator's time.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesThe site had not handled any disputes during the first three years of its existence. The site advertises the general statistic that settlement is reached in 85% of mediations but gives no information on its own record.

CommentsOne of the earliest of the private online ADR sites. The domain name has now been take over by a Conflict Resolution, a San Diego-based network of neutrals that provides face-to-face and telephonic mediation and arbitration.

Name of ProviderInternet Ombudsmann

Other names LocationAustria


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersÖIAT (Austrian Institute for Applied Telecommunication) in co-operation with VKI (Consumer Information Association)

ADR Services Complaint Handling, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filingPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline commercial and consumer disputes for members only

LanguagesGerman


Membership fees of €25 per year. Consumer complaints are free

No information provided

CommentsThe site apologises that it can not assist with private individual and non-member disputes but that it does not receive public funds. An e-commerce quality mark is available.

Name of ProviderInternet Ombudsmannen

Other names LocationSweden


Still OperatingNo

Owners/Funders

ADR Services Information, Complaint Handling, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodUnknownPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline disputes, consumer protection, offline disputes

LanguagesSwedish



CommentsAs well as online ADR, the site attempts to educate consumers on proper uses of the internet and consumer protection issues (Center for Law, Commerce & Technology 2000).

Name of ProviderIntersettle



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersA consortium of eight Scottish law firms

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy and data collection policies.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial claims

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureAnnual fee for law firms plus £20 per case fee


CommentsThe service launched with seven law firm partners and has now recruited an eighth. Protocols for dispute resolution are listed on the site. New users can register for three months free of charge. In July 2003, Intersettle announced its partnership with ODR International, including launch of Scottish equivalent of the Solicitors Room and an online collaborative tool for conveyancers “The Conveyancing Room” using The Claim Room technology.

Name of ProviderIRIS Médiation

Other names LocationFrance


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersIRIS (Imaginons un Réseau Internet Solidaire), a non-profit organisation

ADR Services Complaint handling, MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDisputes involving internet service providers (a form of consumer dispute)

LanguagesFrench

Fee StructureFree

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates61 mediations during the pilot year; 53 were successfully settled. Further statistics are not available on the site.

CommentsIRIS, an organisation seeking to promote individual and public liberties on the Internet, ran a mediation experiment from March 1998 through to March 1999.While this was advertised as a pilot, information and an online request for mediation form are still available on the site which would give members of the public the impression that the service is still available.

Name of ProviderIrish Commercial Court

Other names LocationIreland


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersThe Courts Service, independent body administering Ireland’s courts

ADR Services AdjudicationCommunication MethodElectronic filing, document exchange, electronic presentation of evidence and videoconferencingPrivacy/Security MeasuresUnknown

Any Technical NotesContracted by Fujitsu

Type of Disputes Dealt WithCommercial disputes >€1m

LanguagesSite in English and Irish

Fee StructureAs per normal court fees

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesLaunched January 2004

CommentsThe commercial court is part of the Irish High Court.

Name of ProviderIRS Electronic Account Resolution



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersInternal Revenue Service, U.S. federal tax collection agency

ADR Services NegotiationCommunication MethodWebpage

Privacy/Security MeasuresSecure, password-protected site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithTax disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree


CommentsPilot project launched December 2003 with tax professionals, including lawyers and accountants, who file more than 100 tax returns per year. Various other fast track dispute resolution initiatives are also being trialled.

Name of ProviderJAMS



Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodVideoconferencingPrivacy/Security MeasureseSDN secure videoconferencing

Any Technical NotesVideoconferencing includes studio-quality equipment. Other computers can also be connected to the system to present digital evidence


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$50 scheduling fee.US$200 per hour per location up to US$1400 per day per location


CommentsJAMS is a successful traditional ADR provider that has recently begun to offer videoconferencing for its various ADR processes. Videoconferencing is available on site at 23 JAMS offices around the U.S. with the ability to connect to virtually all other videoconferencing sites throughout the world.

Name of ProviderJustica Sobre Rodas

Other namesJustice on Wheels, Electronic Judge

LocationBrazil


Still OperatingUnknown

Owners/FundersTribunal de Justica do Espirito Santo

ADR Services AdjudicationCommunication MethodMobile laptop, artificial intelligence program “Electronic Judge”Privacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Programmed in visual basic

Type of Disputes Dealt WithVehicle disputes

LanguagesPortuguese

Fee StructureStandard court fees apply


CommentsThe Justica Sobre Rodas (Justice on Wheels) program is a project of the

Court of Espirito Santo, a state in Brazil. Justice Pedro Valls Feu Rosa, who initiated this program, has a history of designing innovative justice programs. He was the first judge of Espirito Santo’s Small Claims Court and has created various software programs to assist the administration of justice that he has donated to diverse Brazilian tribunals (http://www.tj.es.gov.br/desembargadores/pedro.htm). The Justice on Wheels program involves a judge, court clerk and laptop computers traveling on site to where a car crash has occurred. The Electronic Judge program provides the judge with a series of multiple choice questions. It also includes witness reports and forensic evidence. The judge can issue on the spot fines and order damages and jail sentences (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/726837.stm). The website of the Court does not made clear whether the program is still operating.

Name of ProviderLegalGrid Online

Other namesCourtroom21, Court.com, Court21

LocationU.K.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersPrivate company Legal Grid Online Ltd

ADR Services Adjudication, arbitration, consultancy servicesCommunication MethodDocument exchange, multi-party videoconferencingPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

3D videoconferencing technology


LanguagesEnglish


Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesCurrently launching service after pilot and development phase

CommentsLegalGrid Online has developed from the Court21/Courtroom21 demonstration court room project undertaken by Professor Lederer at the William and Mary School of Law, Williamsburg USA and the Leeds University Business School and Departments of Law and Computing. The first demonstration of the system took place in March 2001 and involved an examination of a witness in Australia by a barrister in the UK for a trial in the USA. LegalGrid Online is currently launching as an ODR and consultancy service.

Name of ProviderMediate.com


Year EstablishedApprox 2002 (1996 for site)

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersCo-founders Jim Melamed and John Helie

ADR Services Primarily information. However the “Locate A Mediator” service enables intake for individual practitioners, including ODR services.Communication MethodWebsite

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/726837.stm

http://www.tj.es.gov.br/desembargadores/pedro.htm


Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes. Specialities mentioned include entertainment, employment, family, community, planning and e-commerce

LanguagesSite in English only

Fee StructureSet by individual practitioner

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesOf the 67 practitioners who offer ODR services, 14 list some online mediation experience, including one with 200 cases and three with 100 cases (total of 568).

CommentsProvides listing of service providers in “Locate a Mediator” including those who list online mediation in their expertise. It is possible to initiate ODR from site either through email or Victorian intake form by contacting one of these providers. As of 2 July 2004, 67 of the practitioners who list on the site offer online mediation.

Name of ProviderMediate-net

Other namesUniversity of Maryland Online Mediation Project

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersNational Center on Automated Information Retrieval

ADR Services Mediation Communication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDisputes under Maryland law.Originally focused on family and health disputes

LanguagesEnglish



CommentsThe site also included information (via a reference librarian), a telephone hotline and online tutorial.

Name of ProviderMediation America



Still OperatingNo


ADR Services Mediation, Facilitated Negotiation, Automated Negotiation (no longer offered)Communication MethodOnline filing, web page, multi-party videoconferencing, teleconference, document sharingPrivacy/Security MeasuresVideo and audio conferences are

Any Technical NotesNo

encryptedType of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, primarily business and insurance

LanguagesEnglish

Fee Structure Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information provided

CommentsSite allowed caucusing. For videoconferencing parties required a high speed DSL connection and computer with over 450mHz Pentium Processor, 24bit video card, 256 MB Ram, camera and microphone. Videoconferencing was broadcast quality.

Name of ProviderMediation Arbitration Resolution Services

Other namesMARS, SuperSettle, Fair & Square, ResolveMyDispute.com

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, web page, teleconferencing, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy Statement

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, especially financial disputes and online disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFor consumers, a US$10 filing fee. For merchants, a trustmark costs $120 per year plus charges such as response to claim fee (US$10) and mediation ($15) plus resolution charge of 3%


CommentsMARS appears to have focused its services on mediation and arbitration provided by video and audio. The SuperSettle automated negotiation process is no longer listed on the website. MARS offers a merchant seal program where online merchants agree to use the MARS online ADR process if their own internal handling fails to resolve the dispute.

Name of ProviderMediationline



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersPrivate company

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodEmailPrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy policy. Mediation rules provided.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAny disputes, especially workplace and organisational disputes

LanguagesGerman

Fee Structure€45 filing fee then mediator’s time between €90-€180 per hour split between the parties


CommentsAlso provides training at the related www.communicationline.de site.

Name of ProviderMichigan Cybercourt



Still OperatingNot yet launched

Owners/FundersState of Michigan

ADR Services AdjudicationCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, instant messaging, video streams, teleconferencing, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithBusiness and commercial actions >US$25,000

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$200 filing fee


CommentsCase filed in the Cybercourt can be removed to the circuit court and decisions can be appealed to the Court of Appeals. Cases are adjudicated by a judge without a jury. The Cybercourt has not yet commenced operations due to lack of approval for funds. In 2003 the budget for the Cybercourt was approved by the House Appropriations Judiciary Subcommittee but Senate debate is still required.

Name of ProviderMoney Claim Online



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersUK Court Service

ADR Services Adjudication (filing and response only)Communication MethodWebpage Privacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy and security policies. Secure site.

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithMoney Claims litigation

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUsual court fees apply


CommentsService enables online filing, response, payment of fees and tracking. Part of the UK Court Service.

http://www.communicationline.de/

Name of ProviderNASD



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFinancial industry regulator (it is compulsory for securities firms to be a member of NASD)

ADR Services Arbitration (online filing, case management)Communication MethodWebpagePrivacy/Security MeasuresFull rules and procedures provided on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial industry disputes


Fee StructureFiling fees for consumer disputes from $25-$600 plus hearing fee from $25-$12,000 (depending on value of dispute and number of panelists). Members pay claimant fees of $200-$500 plus some hearing fees or a respondent surcharge of $150-$3750 plus hearing fee.


CommentsOnline filing has been introduced as part of a comprehensive migration to web-based, fully interactive claim filing and management. NASD also provides face to face arbitration and mediation processes. Online training in arbitration is available.

Name of ProviderNational Arbitration Forum



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNational Arbitration Forum

ADR Services Arbitration, Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing and response (plus fax and mail), webpage

Privacy/Security MeasuresDecisions published on site

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureBetween US$1,150 for a one-member panel for a single domain name to US$4,000 for a three-member panel for up to 15 domain names

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates4259 decisions are listed for domain name disputes

CommentsOne of the five approved dispute resolution service providers for domain name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy

(UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999. In April 2004, NAF launched online filing and access to the New Jersey No-Fault arbitration program, including an automated negotiation system. Mediation services are only offered face to face. Arbitration services are provided with online filing and response. NAF purchased eResolution's software after eResolution closed in late 2001.

Name of ProviderNational Mediation

Other namesMosten Mediation

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersMosten Mediation

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, videoconferencingPrivacy/Security MeasuresEthical standards for mediators include confidentiality

Any Technical NotesNo information on type of web system offered


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureNo information provided. Free initial consultation


CommentsNational Mediation also provides face to face arbitration services. Parties can select a mediator/arbitrator from a directory and file the details of their disputes online. Dispute resolution is provided face to face, via teleconferencing, videoconferencing or “web-based capabilities”.

Name of ProviderNew Court City

Other namesVirtual Mediator

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate venture founded by Kristina Eisenacher

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page Privacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithFinancial disputes, employment disputes

LanguagesEnglish



CommentsAutomated negotiation was launched first and then followed by the Virtual Mediator service. It appears that marketing of the site shifted from financial disputes towards employment disputes over time.

Name of ProviderNominet

Other names LocationUK


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNon-profit company, Nominet

ADR Services Facilitated negotiation Communication MethodTelephone, Webpage (online filing and response)Privacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes (.uk names)

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFiling and mediation are free. ₤750 for binding determination.

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates1614 disputes submitted. 55% of cases settle at mediation. Full statistics on site.

CommentsNominet provides mediation and arbitration. Mediation is by online submission of documents and then telephone.

Name of ProviderNotGoodEnough.org



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersPrivate company founded by Dr Fiona Stewart

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, email, faxPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree for consumers; companies can pay for corporate services

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates3000 complaints were filed in its first day. Averages 1800 visits daily.

CommentsThe site provides a space for consumers to submit "gripes". These are then forwarded to the companies involved via email or fax and any company response is posted on the site. Companies that fail to respond and any settlements reached are listed on the site. Alliance partner BrandAide Communications provides companies with access to consumer feedback from the site through its eAlert service

Name of ProviderNovaForum

Other names The Electronic Courthouse

LocationCanada


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersPrivate venture of Teri Kirk, Cheryl Kananz and Margo Langford

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration, Case Appraisal (“Stepped” mediation-arbitration)Communication MethodOnline filing, chat, videoconferencing, email, fax

Privacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer and business disputes, especially cross-border disputes

LanguagesFrench, English, Spanish, Mandarin, German and Italian. Other languages via translation.

Fee StructureUS$12,500 yearly subscription plus US$2,000-US$5,000 for each case

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates During 2000, Nova Forum resolved around 100 cases. On average 6 hours of active resolution time required

CommentsNova Forum aims to settle disputes within 72 hours. Decisions may be made binding by decision of the parties. Companies subscribing to Nova Forum may display a seal and can decide whether to charge consumers for the service. The Electronic Courthouse has been named Member Service supplier to the Canadian Bar Association. Unusually, Nova Forum did much testing before entering the market. Two hundred test scenarios were conducted before launch (Center for Law, Commerce and Technology 2000). It has been apparently been particularly successful with the Canadian Construction industry.Nova Forum has added a case appraisal service since 2001 and is active in public speaking and promotion.

Name of ProviderOmbudsmann.de



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersVerbraucher Initiative funded by the European Commission and Federal Minister for Consumer Protection

ADR Services Complaints HandlingCommunication MethodWebpage, email notice of changes to noticeboardPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure, password protected site. Confidentiality policy

Any Technical Notes128 bit SSL encryption

Type of Disputes Dealt WithInternet consumer disputes where consumer resides in Germany and seller is a company located in the European Union where no litigation is pending

LanguagesGerman. Some information in English

Fee StructureFree. Donations are accepted


CommentsThe process is variously translated on the site as conciliation or arbitration. It appears to be a complaint handling service.

Name of ProviderOnline Confidence

Other namesEurochambres

LocationBelgium


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersEurochambres, a membership organisation of 1300 European

chambers of commerceADR Services Complaint Handling, Facilitated Negotiation, Case Appraisal, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, email, uploading documents, hearingsPrivacy/Security MeasuresPrivacy and security policies provided

Any Technical NotesTechnical support being developed by Infocamere and Consorzio Pisa Ricerche

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline disputes, consumer disputes

LanguagesLanguage common to the parties or language of the transaction

Fee StructureNo information has yet been provided on site


CommentsAppears to be modelled on the successful Square Trade process of "direct negotiation" followed by an evaluation process. The evaluation "Advice" can be binding if the seller previously agreed to be bound. Evaluations up to € 5000 are binding on Online Confidence trustmark holders; however the site can be used for any consumer disputes. Consumers do not lose their right of legal redress by using the site.

Name of ProviderOnline Ombuds Office



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersUniversity of Massachusetts Centre for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution; funded by Hewlett Foundation and National Center for Automated Information Research (NCAIR)

ADR Services Mediation, Complaint Handling, ArbitrationCommunication MethodWeb page, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, especially online and consumer disputes and domain name disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesHandled over 200 cases from 1996 to 2001 with a 50% settlement rate.

CommentsAn early pioneer in online ADR that experimented with a range of technologies as they became available. The Centre for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution continues to remain a thought leader in the field.

Name of ProviderOnline Public Disputes Project



1999 Yes Raab Associates, a public dispute resolution firm.

ADR Services Negotiation Support, Mediation, Arbitration, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodChat, instant messaging, whiteboards, threaded discussion, polling, document sharingPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithPublic disputes

LanguagesEnglish


Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesFour major projects listed

CommentsThe Project designs online processes for public participation and dispute resolution. The Project can arrange tools for online ADR. However dispute resolution facilities are not provided on the site.Services are directed at both Federal/state/local government bodies and ADR practitioners. The Project can train government staff and ADR providers in using online tools and other technologies to enhance public dispute resolution processes.The Project has been less active since Director Colin Rule moved to eBay.

Name of ProviderOnline Resolution

Other namesOnline Mediators

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersMediation Information and Resource Center (John Helie, Jim Melamed and Colin Rule)

ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodWeb page, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site. Firewall. Privacy statement

Any Technical NoteseRoom software

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes. Originally targeted at business to business disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$100 per party for a two hour standard process <US$10,000 up to US$200 per party >US$50,000

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesAt the end of 2001, over 30 cases had been filed.

CommentsAn attractive and well laid out site. At one stage, Online Resolution offered its Resolution Room technology for use by ADR practitioners in their practices (see cached versions of www.resolutionroom.com on web search engines). This service appears to be no longer offered. The site explicitly states standards of conduct for neutrals in accordance with American Bar Association, American Arbitration Association and Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) (now Association for Conflict Resolution) codes of conduct. Rule 2002:129-131 notes that Online Resolution changed its focus over time as markets changed: while most of its

work prior to 2001 was in e-commerce, the downturn in the U.S. economy forced it to look to other areas such as workplace disputes, insurance cases and multi-party public disputes.The Project has been less active since Director Colin Rule moved to eBay.

Name of ProviderPayPal


Year EstablishedApprox 2003 (PayPal 1998)

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FunderseBay

ADR Services Negotiation, Case EvaluationCommunication MethodWebpage, online filingPrivacy/Security MeasuresTrustE and BBB Online certified. Privacy policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithE-commerce disputes

LanguagesEnglish, German, French, Danish, Finnish, Chinese, Italian, Korean, Spanish, Japanese, Dutch, Norwegian

Fee StructureMostly free

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNot provided. Total of 45m account members worldwide

CommentsPayPal provides Buyer and Seller protection policies including ODR procedures. PayPal is available in 38 countries.

Name of ProviderPrivate Judge



Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Mediation, Arbitration, Case Appraisal, Mock JuryCommunication MethodOnline Filing, instant messaging/chat, videoconferencing, telephone conferencing, face-to-facePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithBusiness and technology disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureCase Appraisal: US$500 per party for up to 30 pages submissionMediation: US$2000-$5000 per party per dayArbitration: US$1200 Administration Fee plus arbitrator fees.


CommentsPrivate Judge provides retired Federal, State and International Judges to help resolve disputes. When parties register, they can choose between various communication methods for "conference scheduling".

Name of ProviderResolution Canada



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersUnknown

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresDecisions are published on the site

Any Technical Notes



Fee StructureBetween C$1,750 for a one-member panel for a single domain name to C$6,400 for a three-member panel for 10 domain names

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesCase decisions listed on site. Six cases to date.

CommentsResolutionCanada is authorized by the Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) to resolve disputes on the Internet relating to registration of .ca domain names in the CIRA Registry. The site is beautifully laid out and easy to navigate. However no information is provided on the company operating the service.

Name of ProviderResolution Forum



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNon-profit associated with the South Texas College of Law

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodWeb page, threaded discussion, chatPrivacy/Security MeasuresPassword protected access to website. Transcript of session can be destroyed

Any Technical NotesCAN-WIN software



Fee StructureUS$250 per hour per party

Volume of Cases/Settlement Rates75% of cases have been resolved favourably.

CommentsProject is closely aligned with the State Bar of Texas Corporate Counsel Section and the State Bar of Texas ADR Section. Site allows caucusing. All mediators and negotiators agree to comply with the Code of Ethics of the Institute for Responsible Dispute Resolution. The site is in the process of implementing video conferencing.

Name of ProviderResolve It Now

Other namesResolveitnow.com

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo


ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$150 per party for settlement >US$3,000; 5% of settlement <US$3,000 per party

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo statistics available

CommentsAll settlements reached are binding.

Name of ProviderRetail Tenancy Unit NSW



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersDepartment of State and Regional Development NSW

ADR Services Mediation, Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, online fee paying, threaded discussion board for communication with adviser and mediator (but not between parties)Privacy/Security MeasuresPassword protection

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithRetail tenancy disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureNo additional fees for online services ($165 application fee and $550 flat mediation fee)


CommentsThe Retail Tenancy Unit service permits an applicant to register for mediation services. Once registration is complete, the client can: lodge a Retail Tenancy Dispute Application Form online pay required application and mediation fees engage in a bulletin board discussion with either an advice officer or a

mediator determine the progress of the application up to the mediation date upload any supporting documents to assist with the applicationSome shuttle mediation could be supported by the system. However, direct party-to-party mediations only take place face-to-face. The Unit conducts around 250 mediations per year in both metropolitan and regional and rural areas. Advice officers are staff who provide complaint handling services. Mediators are independent and are selected from a panel. Mediation rules set out standards of conduct for mediators.

Name of ProviderScenario Builder



2003 Yes Acumentum Pty Ltd (Russell Yardley, Lyndsey Cattermole and others)

ADR Services Guidance and Intake

Communication MethodOnline which can be integrated with call centre supportPrivacy/Security MeasuresLDAP directory authentication

Any Technical NotesJ2EE Tom Cat Jboss or Websphere with Oracle 9i or DB2

Type of Disputes Dealt WithMost disputes

LanguagesEnglish (others can be accommodated)

Fee StructureASP Service or application licence for internal installation. Licence charged on number of dispute scenario authors and number of published dispute scenarios

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesUnlimited

CommentsAcumentum’s Scenario Builder is a recent innovation in providing a powerful yet simple system for any dispute resolution expert to capture scenarios for guiding people through many and varied disputes. Scenario Builder is a system to capture knowledge in any dispute process to create a decision tree. The system then automatically generates webpages that can be easily be part of an Intranet, Extranet or Internet site to guide people through the resolution of their dispute. It can be linked to an existing website to assist with intake of disputes and could be integrated with online mediation or arbitration processes.Scenario Builder was used by the Department of Justice Australia in its disputeinfo site www.justice.vic.gov.au/disputeinfo to guide people through their dispute resolution options. This has not yet been integrated with an online mediation process but this may be a future development.

Name of ProviderSettlementNOW

Other namesSettlementnow.com

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/Funders

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page


Type of Disputes Dealt WithInsurance claims

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$219


CommentsUsers must agree to be bound by settlement reached. SettlementNOW appears to have been taken over by Allsettle.com between 2000 and 2001.

http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/disputeinfo

Name of ProviderSettlement Online



Still OperatingNo


ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodBlind bidding, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSSL secure site

Any Technical NotesThawte authentic site

Type of Disputes Dealt WithPrimarily insurance disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$150 per party on settlement

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information provided.

CommentsSettlement Online began as a pilot project of Safeco Insurance Company. A press release on the site announces that Settlement Online has formed a strategic alliance with Cybersettle and redirects to the Cybersettle site.

Name of ProviderSettleOnline



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersResolution Systems, a provider of traditional ADR

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodCase filing, web page, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes



Fee StructureNo filing fee. US$75-US$200 on settlement

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesAs of October 2001, 2000 cases had been filed.

CommentsAll inquiries are now automatically routed to the Cybersettle site.Traditional mediation and arbitration were available if automated negotiation did not reach settlement.

Name of ProviderSettleSmart



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersSettle Smart, Inc.

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll financial disputes, especially insurance disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$20 filing fee, US$50 fee if other party becomes involved, US$80 settlement fee. The total fee is $225 for cases >US$20,000


CommentsUnusually for an automated negotiation program, non-monetary terms could be included in the settlement as "additional settlement criteria" (Schultz et al 2001).

Name of ProviderSettleTheCase

Other namesSettlethecase.com

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Negotiation SupportCommunication MethodWeb pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSSL secure site

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish



CommentsThe site does not appear to have been updated since 2001. SettleTheCase is interested in forming partnerships with ADR professionals to promote its service.

Name of ProviderSmartSettle

Other namesOne Accord

LocationCanada


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersICAN Systems, President Ernest Thiessen

ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation, Negotiation SupportCommunication MethodComputer graphical user interface, telephone, face-to-facePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site. Privacy policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithComplex high value disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureLicense fees on application. Facilitation and success fees depend on case complexity

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesOver 80% settlement rates with real cases

CommentsBeautifully designed site with optional non-Flash version. Online demo is informative. Process goes beyond negotiation in offering various quantitative and qualitative analysis tools.Parties can use a single facilitator to help them prepare and guide them through the negotiation process or each have a private facilitator. A new feature in 2004 is the ability to receive notification of charges by SMS or

email.

Name of ProviderSopra Mediation



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersSOPRA (Soziale Praxis fur Beratung, Schulung und Therapie)

ADR Services MediationCommunication MethodOnline mediation is offered as a service but it is not specified how it takes place.Privacy/Security MeasuresNo information provided

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithWorkplace, family and organisational disputes

LanguagesGerman



CommentsSopra Mediation also offers training, coaching and therapy services

Name of ProviderSquare Trade



Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Facilitated Negotiation (“self-service”), Mediation, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline disputes (originally eBay only), real estate disputes, other offline disputes

LanguagesEnglish. Has conducted mediation in German, Spanish and other languages

Fee StructureThere are various user fees depending on which "marketplace" the dispute has originated in. The Square Trade seal is $7.50 per month, with a 30 day free offer. Originally fees were annual ranging from US$100 per year for revenue <$50,000 to $6,400 for >US$1 bn.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesOver 1.5 million disputes handled between February 2000 and June 2004. Currently handling over 80,000 new disputes per month and over 400 requests for mediation per day

CommentsNeutrals must abide by ethical standards adapted from the Ethical Standards set forth by the Society for Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) (now Association for Conflict Resolution). Square Trade also lists standards of practice. Square Trade is broadening its application to eBay, Yahoo!, Google and Californian Association of Realtors disputes.

Name of ProviderSwiftCourt

Other names LocationIndia


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersEOL India, part of private company EOL with offices in Boston, Colorado and Bangalore

ADR Services Litigation (arbitration)Communication MethodSecure web-pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresUnknown

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesUnknown. EOL site in English


Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesNo information

CommentsEOL provides Employee Online, a comprehensive human resources administration system. SwiftCourt was an initiative of EOL’s Indian office. Duration Inc, a New Jersey company, also lists SwiftCourt as a product to be launched. It may be that it was developed in partnership or has been acquired.

Name of ProviderThe Claim Room

Other namesThe Mediation Room, The Negotiation Room, The Solicitors Room

LocationU.K.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersSolicitor Graham Ross along with legal academics and QCs

ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Arbitration, MediationCommunication MethodBlind bidding, web page, chat, caucusing. In 2004 a live voice conferencing facility was added within The Mediation RoomPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure site (128 bit SSL)

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll disputes, including non-monetary issues

LanguagesEnglish

Fee Structure£1,500 per year subscription£3,750 per year for fully badged site under licenseAutomated negotiation: introductory offer of £500 for 25 cases


CommentsA well-designed site making excellent use of Flash technology. Individuals can use the service and firms can become members and process group claims. Software can also be licensed by groups to create their own badged sites.Services cater for multi-party disputes with unlimited parties being able to be involved. Caucusing is possible in all services.Other non-ADR services include The Conveyancing Room, the Solicitors Room and the Advice Agency Room.The ADR Group, one of the largest providers of face-to-face ADR in the UK, used The Claim Room software to run a demonstration mediation during Cyberweek 2003.

The Claim Room works in association with the UK’s leading disability rights network, Disability Alliance, running “The Solicitors Room” for a panel of over 130 solicitors as a virtual office to act for disabled clients.

Name of ProviderThe Hearing Room



Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersAuscript Pty Ltd, Counsel's Chambers Limited

ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, document management, email, telephone, fax, videoconferencing, real time transcripts, video stream, chatPrivacy/Security MeasuresDigital security

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithCommercial, litigious disputes

LanguagesNo information. Publicity in English

Fee Structure$1320 per day for basic services


CommentsIt is not clear how long this "virtual arbitration room" operated for after its launch. No information is now available on the internet and the Hearing Room site is not functioning. One of the venture partners, Auscript, has been taken over by Voice IQ Inc. since this time. This initiative received substantial publicity, including a high profile launch by the Chief Justice of NSW and a number of articles in computer and technical journals.

Name of ProviderThe Virtual Magistrate


Year EstablishedMay 1996, relaunched 2000

Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersChicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology sponsored by the National Centre for Automated Information Research (NCAIR), the American Arbitration Association and the Cyberspace Law Institute

ADR Services Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, emailPrivacy/Security MeasuresDecisions are published on the site

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFree

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesOne case between 1996 and 2000.No information available since relaunch

CommentsThe Virtual Magistrate handled the first ever online case in 1996. Its "arbitrations" are not binding. Procedural rules are provided on the site.

Name of ProviderThuiswinkel.org

Other namesHome Shopping

LocationNetherlands


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersFoundation for Consumer Complaints Boards (Stichting Geshillencommissies voor Consumentenzahen SGC)

ADR Services Complaint handling (conciliation)Communication MethodOnline filing, communicationPrivacy/Security MeasuresUnknown

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithConsumer disputes, especially online

LanguagesDutch. No information provided in English



CommentsMost dispute resolution services are provided offline with the main service online being filing. There are plans to extend the scheme to provide more services online.

Name of ProviderTRUSTe

Other namesWatchDog

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersNon-profit initiative

ADR Services Complaint handlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, email, teleconferencePrivacy/Security MeasuresConfidentiality policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline privacy disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureNo cost for consumer complaints.License to use the TRUSTe seal costs between $US599 to $12,999 for a single brand, depending on revenue. Up to 300 brands can be covered for US$75,000

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesThousands of complaints have been handled as of March 2003

CommentsComplaint handling is provided for disputes involving businesses that are licensed by the TRUSTe trustmark. The Network Advertising Initiative has engaged TRUSTe to provide online ADR for consumers. It also offers a EU Safe Harbour and Children's Privacy Seal.TRUSTe has received stinging criticism for lack of disclosure and violating consumer privacy in its own website (Gellman 2000a). These have been rectified. The web site is easy to understand and procedures are clear.

Name of ProviderTrustEnforce

Other names LocationSouth Africa


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersTrustEnforce Pty Ltd, a private

companyADR Services Small Claims Handling, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodWebpagePrivacy/Security MeasuresThawte secure site. Privacy policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAny disputes, South African or international

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureMediation at R1000 per 200 hours. Arbitration at R1500 or percentage of the amount in dispute. Web seal includes free mediation subject to negotiation


CommentsSubscribers can subscribe by agreeing to adhere to TrustEnforce standards and follow ODR procedures. Mediation subscribers also agree to make the mediation process free to their customers.

Name of ProviderUSSettle.com

Other namesUS Settlement Corp.

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersPrivate venture by retired judge, arbitrator and mediator

ADR Services Automated NegotiationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresPasswords, site encryption

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$250 on settlement

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesThe number of cases to date is not available on the site. However the site had handled approximately 20 medical malpractice claims as of November 2001.Success rates are advertised as between 40-50%.

CommentsThe site was associated with eAttorney.com for clients who are looking for legal advice. Traditional mediation services were offered if no settlement reached.

Name of ProviderWebAssured

Other namesAdDResS

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Complaint Handling, Arbitration

Communication MethodOnline filing, email, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresResults of specific complaints are publicised on the site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithAll commercial disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureTrustmark holders pay US$180 per year upwards depending on their revenue. Complaint filing is free.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesWebAssured publicises success rates of over 95% in getting complaints against WebAssured member firms resolved, and 76% against non-members. Over 80% of resolved within 48 hours.

CommentsWebAssured offers a trustmark and insurance program including a dispute resolution service. Complaints can be filed even against non-member companies.The positives and negatives of this service are well outlined in Consumers International 2001.

Name of ProviderWEBdispute


Year EstablishedMarch 2000

Still OperatingNo


ADR Services ArbitrationCommunication MethodCase filing, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline commercial disputes, consumer disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFiling fee from US$50 (<US$500 in dispute) to US$300 (>US$10,000)Arbitration fee from US$50-US$300


CommentsThe site was being reconstructed in 2003. It appears to be no longer available.

Name of ProviderWebMediate

Other namesWebsettlement, Webmediation, Webarbitration

LocationU.S.A.


Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Automated Negotiation, Mediation, ArbitrationCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, threaded discussionPrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure "Resolution Forums."Confidentiality policy

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithInsurance claims and business-to-business disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureUS$30 filing Automated Negotiation: 5% of settlement <$5,000, $100 max2% of settlement >$5,000, $400 max divided equally between the partiesMediation/Arbitration: US$250/hour


CommentsWebMediate can provide feedback on an aggregate basis to enable e-commerce sites and insurance providers to identify major sources of customer conflict. If desired, WebMediate can refer to potential mediators or arbitrators around the U.S.A. WebMediate is a winner of the LycosLabs Business Competition.

Name of ProviderWeb Trader

Other namesWebtrader, Which ? Webtrader

LocationNetherlands,Belgium, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, U.K, Germany


Still OperatingNo

Owners/FundersEight European consumer organisations

ADR Services Complaint HandlingCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page, emailPrivacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline consumer disputes

LanguagesEnglish, Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish, Portugese, German

Fee StructureFree for consumers to make complaints. Free for e-commerce companies to join. Originally funded by the European Commission.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesVaries according to the country involved. The UK site reports that over 3.5 years it accepted more than 2,700 online traders from more than 8,000 applications and resolved more than 2,000 disputes on behalf of consumers

CommentsA European scheme where e-commerce companies can use a trustmark if they comply with a code of conduct, including online ADR rules. Complaint handling is offered by the member consumer organisations. The Which?WebTrader scheme is now closed.

Name of ProviderWeCanSettle



Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersIrvings, a personal injury law firm

ADR Services Automated Negotiation

Communication MethodBlind bidding, email, web pagePrivacy/Security MeasuresSecure web page; digital certificate; privacy policy

Any Technical Notes


LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFrom £25 per party <£1,000 up to £150 per party >£10,000


CommentsAttractive site with option for non-Flash version. Not updated since 2001.

Name of ProviderWord&Bond



Still OperatingYes


ADR Services Arbitration, Case AppraisalCommunication MethodOnline filing, web page Privacy/Security Measures Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithOnline consumer disputes, business to business disputes

LanguagesEnglish

Fee StructureFee payable by consumers making a complaint (amounts not listed). €15 handling fee applies.Trustmark holders pay a license fee between €350-€13000 plus €250-€400 per arbitration.

Volume of Cases/Settlement RatesConfidentiality requirements preclude releasing settlement details. 100% success rate in settlement.

CommentsWord&Bond web site is a little difficult to navigate. Information about consumer fees could be clearer.

Name of ProviderWorld Intellectual Property Organisation Arbitration and Mediation Center

Other namesWIPO Online Dispute Resolution

LocationSwitzerland


Still OperatingYes

Owners/FundersWorld Intellectual Property Organisation

ADR Services Arbitration, MediationCommunication MethodOnline filing (mail and fax)Privacy/Security MeasuresDecisions published on site

Any Technical Notes

Type of Disputes Dealt WithDomain name disputes, intellectual property contracts

LanguagesEnglish, French, Spanish


Between US$1,500 for a one-member panel for a single domain name to US$5,000 for a three-member panel for 10 domain names

Has administered more than 6,000 UDRP cases involving more than 10,000 domain names. Also handled 17 requests for arbitration and 26 requests for mediation, most during 2003-2004.

CommentsOne of the five approved dispute resolution service providers for domain name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) in 1999.

online dispute resolution sites assessed

Documents