Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract When e-commerce appeared in the 1990s it brought with it disputes related to its operation. E-commerce is risky as the contracting parties do not even know each other, not to mention the fact that disputes have additional legal difficulties concerning jurisdiction and applicable law. However, e-commerce websites have worked out online dispute resolution (ODR) systems in order to maintain the trust of their users, employing an efficient and impartial method if problems arise from deals made on their website. These internal ODR systems are considered successful as they are faster, cheaper and more appropriate than asking for remedy from the courts. As online marketplaces resolve tens of millions of disputes a year, their influence cannot be avoided. The traditional court system fails to protect consumer rights in high-volume and low-value international transactions in practice. This circumstance raises the question of whether internal dispute resolution systems of private e-commerce sites could develop in such a way that fulfils the minimum procedural fairness requirements for dispute resolution and that is acceptable according to substantial laws. Is justice served in online disputes? Who is responsible for making just decisions, and to what extent can ODR procedures be expected to meet the principles of traditional civil proceedings?
Dóra Pálfi (Thu,) studied this question.