Riikka KOULU, « Täytäntöönpanon yksityistyminen eli miten teknologia mullistaa tapamme ymmärtää riidanratkaisu? » [« Privatisation of Enforcement or How Technology Changes Our Perception of Dispute Resolution »], (2019) 3 Oikeus 265.
The possibility of enforcing a decision by force, if necessary, is a central aspect of legal protection when the resolution of a dispute is not voluntarily adhered to. Typically, the binding nature of a decision is perceived as a distinctive feature of state adjudication, and the enforcement of decisions produced in private dispute resolution has traditionally required judicial oversight before access to the public enforcement apparatus, as is the case with arbitral awards. However, technology-assisted conflict management offers alternative means of creating binding outcomes, and these mechanisms often eliminate the need for public conflict management in digital environments. Additionally, EU regulatory measures favor out-of-court conflict management on digital platforms. The author argues that the digitalization of conflict management is connected to privatization trends, which differ from the earlier principles of alternative dispute resolution in that they focus on the enforcement phase of the resolution rather than the resolution itself. The article examines the privatization of enforcement through two examples of digital conflict management: online dispute resolution, which has become established alongside e-commerce, and blockchain-based smart contracts aimed at preventing conflicts, both of which are reshaping our understanding of how binding resolutions are ultimately implemented. In addition to raising questions about the quality of dispute resolution and procedural safeguards in the absence of judicial oversight, the privatization of enforcement challenges procedural law research to adopt new perspectives on the diversity of conflict management.
Ce contenu a été mis à jour le 23 août 2024 à 13 h 42 min.
