ICT-Supported Dispute Resolution

  • Claudia Cevenini
  • Gianluigi Fioriglio
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4884)


This paper aims at describing how the use of Information and Communication Technologies can positively contribute to the resolution of disputes. Once a conflict arises, the parties have on the one side the possibility to resort to Courts (judicial dispute resolution); on the other side, they can agree to submit the issue to an arbitrator or mediator (alternative dispute resolution). While in judicial dispute resolution and partly in arbitration the introduction of ICT necessarily has to comply with the rules of procedural law, mediation allows for a higher freedom and possibly for entirely on-line procedures. Both cases are examined below.


ICT information and communication technologies judicial dispute resolution alternative dispute resolution arbitration mediation on-line dispute resolution ADR ODR ALIS project 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fabri, M.: Information and Communication Technology for Justice: the Italian Experience. In: Oskamp, A., Lodder, A.R., Apistola, M. (eds.) IT Support of the Judiciary. IT & Law, vol. 4, pp. 111–133. Asser Press, The Hague (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Velicogna, M.: Justice Systems and ICT. What can be learned from Europe? Utrecht L. Rev. 3, 129–147 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corte Suprema di Cassazione – Ufficio statistico: Statistiche anno 2006 (last access: 26.02.2008),
  4. 4.
    Pacchioli, P., Pappalardo, F.: Il decreto ingiuntivo telematico con valore legale: l’esperienza del tribunale di Milano. Diritto dell’internet 2, 203–210 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ministero della Giustizia, Processo Civile Telematico (last access: 26.02.2008),
  6. 6.
    Fioriglio, G.: Temi di informatica giuridica. Aracne, Rome (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fabri, M., Langbroek, P.M. (eds.): The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buonomo, G.: Processo telematico e firma digitale. Giuffrè, Milano (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Camardi, C. (ed.): Metodi on line di risoluzione delle controversie. Arbitrato telematico e ODR, CEDAM, Milan (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maggipinto, A. (ed.): Sistemi alternativi di risoluzione delle controversie nella Società dell’Informazione, Nyberg Edizioni, Milan (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shah, A.: Using ADR to Resolve Online Disputes. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology 10 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    IPROnto – Intellectual Property Rights Ontology (last access: 16.01.2008),
  13. 13.
    Sali, R.: Risolvionline Experience: A New ODR Approach for Consumers and Companies. In: Proceedings of the UNECE Forum on ODR 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lodder, A., Zeleznikow, J.: Developing an Online Dispute Resolution Environment: Dialogue Tools and Negotiation Systems in a Three Step Model. The Harvard Negotiation Law Review 10, 287–338 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Celentano, F.: L’utilizzo del DTD nel processo civile telematico. Diritto dell’Internet 4, 415–418 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morek, R.: Online Arbitration: Admissibility within the Current Legal Framework (last access: 26.02.2008),
  17. 17.
    Katsh, E., Rifkin, J.: Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace. John Wiley & sons inc, Hoboken (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Contaldo, A., Gorga, M.: Le regole del processo civile telematico anche alla luce della più recente disciplina del SICI. Diritto dell’Internet 1, 5–23 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Cevenini
    • 1
  • Gianluigi Fioriglio
    • 1
  1. 1.CIRSFID – University of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations