Internet Disputes, Fairness in Arbitration and Transnationalism: A Reply to Dr Hörnle

International Journal of Law and Information, Forthcoming

13 Pages Posted: 10 Apr 2011

See all articles by Thomas Schultz

Thomas Schultz

King's College London; University of Geneva

Date Written: January 31, 2011

Abstract

This article is a reply to Julia Hörnle's book Cross-border Internet Dispute Resolution. Starting from Dr Hörnle's insistence on fairness, the author discusses three dimensions of online arbitration that shape the contours of justice in a transnational dispute resolution setting: accuracy, due process and applicable law. The author contends that online arbitration must remain limited to seeking approximate truth, applying an 80/20 principle to due process, where 20 per cent of the efforts yield 80 of the results in terms of due process. More importantly, the author maintains that the pursuit of the sort of justice with associate with the rule law requires online arbitration to apply transnational rules, and national consumer laws.

Keywords: international arbitration, transnational law, fairness, online dispute resolution, online arbitration, due process, meta-justice, UDRP, ebay, consumer protection, lois de police

Suggested Citation

Schultz, Thomas, Internet Disputes, Fairness in Arbitration and Transnationalism: A Reply to Dr Hörnle (January 31, 2011). International Journal of Law and Information, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1805831

Thomas Schultz (Contact Author)

King's College London ( email )

Somerset House East Wing
Strand
London, WC2R 2LS
United Kingdom

University of Geneva ( email )

102 Bd Carl-Vogt
Genève, CH - 1205
Switzerland

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
201
Abstract Views
1,280
rank
155,734
PlumX Metrics