Going Online with ODR Instruction in U.S.

Law Schools: A focus on Online Instruction of

International Commercial Arbitration and International Commercial Mediation.

Presented to: Professor Mel Rubin, University of Miami, School of Law

For Submission as coursework for: Advanced Mediation

Presented by: Christopher Mark Macneill

Date: May 14th, 2008

Research Objective:

The objective of this paper is to review the availability of online dispute resolution (ODR)1

1 Also known as online ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) and defined as “the application
instruction in the United States for certification and degree programs specializing in International

Commercial Arbitration2 and/or International Commercial Mediation3.

The YAHOO and GOOGLE Search engines on the worldwide web were utilized, as well as a

search via WESTLAW. The researcher also draws on and integrates his acquired knowledge

through online instructional training and experience as an online adjunct faculty instructor for

corporate strategy and problem solving related courses for universities in the United States and

Canada from 2001 to 2007.

of dispute resolution skills and resources over a network.” Further note that “both national
governmental agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, and international agencies, such
as the European Union and the Hague Conference on Private International Law, have identified
online ADR as a priority. These agencies have come to understand that while there is a growing
need for dispute resolution in cyberspace, traditional legal alternatives are not likely to be the
dispute resolution of choice in cyberspace.” Ethan Katsh, “The New Frontier: Online ADR
Becoming a Global Priority”, Dispute Resolution Magazine, Winter 2000. I.e. as per
www.arbitration.com/articles/define-arbitration/index.php “In ODR, a claim is filed online and
the proceedings occur entirely over the Internet, based on documentation presented by both
parties.”
2 “Arbitration is a voluntary process in which a third party neutral, the arbitrator, hears the facts
of the case and renders a decision that may be binding upon the parties. Parties may agree to
arbitration in a contract or after the dispute arises. (Source; the Supreme Court of Ohio). See also
Daniel K. Winters and Lauren E. Sweeney, “Contract Law, Arbitration Agreements and the
Internet”, New Jersey Law Journal, 08-21-2003 “as the court stressed in Marchak [v. Claridge
Commons, Inc., 134 N.J. 275 (1993)], however, the favored status of arbitration is not without
limits. In the absence of a consensual understanding, neither party is entitled to force the other to
arbitrate their dispute..[a] clause depriving a citizen of access to the courts should clearly state its
purpose. The point is to assure that the parties know that in electing arbitration as the exclusive
remedy, they are waiving their time-honored right to sue.” Whereas Court-ordered arbitration
typically is mandatory and may be binding or non-binding depending on the State of jurisdiction.
(Source; the Supreme Court of Ohio).
3 “Mediation is a voluntary process in which a third party neutral, the mediator, assists the
parties to a dispute in crafting a resolution that is acceptable to both sides.” (Source; the Supreme
Court of Ohio).
Research Findings and Statement of Facts:

Limited courses were identified for online international commercial arbitration and dispute

resolution in general as being available from North American sources (U.S. and Canada). In

contrast it is readily recognized that international commercial arbitration and mediation are

rapidly growing4, as global trade has grown rapidly in recent years particularly B2B5 and B2C6

business across borders via the internet.7 As well generally (both domestically and

internationally) arbitration and mediation8 as forms of dispute resolutions alternative to litigation,

both on9 and off line, have been rapidly growing around the world (via conventional settings

external to the court and via virtual asynchronous and ubiquitous online venues) .

On review of ODR courses available via the internet and distance based correspondence a

limited field of programs available to the global marketplace for higher education was identified.

They include a 0.5 hour module of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Commercial

4 “International Commercial Arbitration has become big business. There are more than 120
institutional arbitration centers worldwide.” Dr. Ljiljana Biukovic, “International Commercial
Arbitration in Cyberspace: Recent Developments”, 22 Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus 319, p.319 (Spring
2002, Symposium: International Economic Conflict and Resolution).
5 Business to Business.
6 Business to Consumer.
7 “It is clear that cyberspace is growing and that, increasingly, cyberspace is where disputes
are.” Ethan Katsh, “The New Frontier: Online ADR Becoming a Global Priority”, Dispute
Resolution Magazine, Winter 2000.
8 “What is the difference between mediation and arbitration? In mediation, the parties control
the outcome or agreement. In arbitration, the arbitrator will make a decision based on the
evidence presented. Mediation agreements may be broad whole arbitration decisions are limited
to the facts presented in the arbitration hearing.” (Source; The Supreme Court of Ohio).
9 Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) includes both arbitration and mediation, or a combination
of both. Negotiation is a third form of dispute resolution sometimes identified which is distinct
but not mutually exclusive of arbitration and mediation, in that the later two includes elements
and varying degrees of negotiation as being implicit in their respective processes.
Arbitration component of an online business skills development course hosted by

DiscoveryVIP.com Training10; the ITT Technical Institute11; degree and certificate programs

offered by non-law departments of the Colorado Technical University Online and Colorado State

University with both respectively partnered with privately owned Institute for Advanced Dispute

Resolution (IADR) Centre of Colorado12; the University of North Carolina - Greensboro’s online

conflict resolution certificate program provided by a non-law department13; Sullivan University

(Louisville, KY) 100% Online Global Access M.S. in Dispute Resolution; Abilene Christian

University (TX) Center for Conflict resolution, Master’s Degree and Graduate Certificate in

Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation; Australia’s prestigious University of Adelaide’s School

of Law, professional certification in arbitration program14; the ADR Institute of Canada

arbitration course offered via arbitration15; and the program structure which appears most flexible

and credible from a certification perspective, The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (U.K.)16

10 ADR Commercial Arbitration http://www.discoveryvip.com/training/Online/Business

%20Skills%20Development/ADR%20Commercial%20Arbitration.php
11 “Each ITT Technical Institute is either authorized or licensed by the state in which it is
located and is accredited by or in the process of seeking accreditation from an accrediting agency
recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. All ITT Technical Institutes (except in some
instances the most recently opened institutes) are eligible to participate in the federal student
financial aid programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended, and as administered by the U.S. Department of Education.” http://www.itt-tech.edu/?
code=TFL-Enh-2
12 http://www.iadrglobal.org/coursesprogams.php
http://www.ctuonline.edu/degree_programs/IADR.aspxhttp://www.learn.colostate.edu/certificate
s/graduate/mediation.dot
13 http://web.uncg.edu/dcl/icampus/degree/online-conflict-resolution-certificate.html
14 Nova Southeastern University, Conflict Analysis & Resolution Department, Graduate School
of Humanities and Social Sciences.
15 ADR Institute of Canada at www.adrcanada.ca (requires password): arbitration is offered
through correspondence.
16 The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK) http://www.arbitrators.org/Courses/index.asp?
pd=1http://www.arbitrators.org/Courses/QualIntro.asphttp://www.arbitrators.org/Courses/PostGr
which in cooperation with the University of London External Program17 offered separately but

with some shared courses by University College of London and the Queen Mary University of

London18 law schools provide specialized post-graduate certificates, diplomas, masters and

doctoral degrees in arbitration, which are also graduating students successfully completing the

arbitration and mediation course work, advanced waiver with respect to associate, member and

fellowship status with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (U.K.). The CIArb has branch

associations around the world including the United States, Canada and Australia. The respective

professional designations earned under this arrangement are ACIArb, MCIArb, or FCIArb.

Effective January 2008, CIArb’s International Arbitration and Mediation Centre on a joint

venture basis with QMUL’s Centre for Commercial Law Studies, School of International

Arbitration (SIA) commenced offering online a Post-Graduate Diploma in International

Mediation (ADR) to compliment the existing Post-Graduate Diploma in International Arbitration

program. “The aim of the School of International Arbitration, established in 1985, [is] to develop

programs at [the] post-graduate level for those involved with dispute settlement, whether as

arbitrators, mediators, counsel, or expert witnesses, as well as to participate in areas of research

relating to dispute resolution. The school has undisputed expertise in delivering courses, taught

in London or by distance learning, and has trained more than 2000 students in the settlement of

international disputes.”19

adDiploma_Mediation.asp
17http://www.londonexternal.ac.uk/prospective_students/postgraduate/laws/academic_direction.
shtml
18 http://www.law.qmul.ac.uk/postgraduate/diplomas/#specialisedPostgrad
19 “An added bonus for the new program has been the participation of the CIArb throughout its
Analysis & Supplementary Research:

The ODR online instruction and certification programs provided in the U.K. include a diverse

background of students enrolling from around the world. Unfortunately comparable online ODR

instruction and certification programs are not provided in the United States20 nor Canada.

It is quiet oxymoronic to see a plethora of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) services available

online for both online and offline originated disputes. The internet has proven to be a very

flexible and effective means of communications for ODR purposes and yet online instruction of

the subject matter is not yet broadly provided, and in particular is excluded from law school

deliver in the US.21

The National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution, University of Massachusetts-

Amherst (MA) provides considerable useful information linkages for ODR international industry

development and its recognition that students who succeed in the diploma will be fully exempt
from all of its academic requirements for Fellowship of the Institute.” See SIA Post-Graduate
Diploma in International Mediation (ADR) brochure online at QMUL’s website available at
footnote #9.
20 “The Dispute Resolution Section maintains a listing of training programs for mediators at
www.supreme.gov/dispute_resolution/BasicTraining.pdf. Training information may also be
available from national dispute resolution organizations, such as the American Bar Association at
www.abanet.org/dispute/home.html, the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) at
www.acrnet.org, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts at www.afccnet.org and
Mediate.com at www.mediate.com.” Source; The Supreme Court of Ohio.
21 “The Organization for Economic Co-operational Development (“OECD”) studies credit the
United States with about four-fifths of the world’s electronic commerce, Western Europe with
about ten percent.” Dr. Ljiljana Biukovic, “International Commercial Arbitration in Cyberspace:
Recent Developments”, 22 Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus 319, p. 326 (Spring 2002, Symposium:
International Economic Conflict and Resolution).
standards (ADR and/or ODR) and a comprehensive listing of international ODR providers22. See

Schedules 1 and 2 per Appendix 1. The significance of these listings is that they serve as a clear

demonstration of the extent to which ODR is being provided and regulated on a global basis and

contrasts remarkably with an absence of online ODR instruction and certification programs. A

logical extension for ODR as a sub-industry within the field of ADR is that as an online activity,

solving disputes typically from online or IT and IP related disputes, the most logically

appropriate venue for instruction on the discipline one would think would be via the internet. Yet,

through research and review it can be seen that globally ODR online instruction and certification,

particularly in the US, is very limited. As Ethan Katsh states; “The efforts discussed here are

interesting and impressive but are only a small beginning in applying the force of cyberspace to

building trust, repairing relationships and allowing transactions to occur with a minimum of

risk.“

Dispute resolution through arbitration and mediation involves a myriad of laws and legal

regulations that facilitates and governs the determination and enforcement of arbitral decisions.

This myriad of a framework involves primarily four distinct layers of regulation; contract law,

procedural arbitration rules, national arbitration law, and international enforcement treaties.23

Any program of instruction in international commercial arbitration or mediation (whether online

or off-line), for degree or non-degree programs and/or for certification, should incorporate

coverage of each of these elements of the ADR legal and regulatory framework. To use the

22 See www.odr.info/index.php and www.odr.info/providers.php

23 Frank A. Cona, “Application of Online Systems in Alternative Dispute Resolution”, Buffalo
Law Review, 1997. See “Modern Legal Framework”.
internet and online techniques to solve disputes offers the same advantages as traditional ADR

methods e.g. avoids high cost of litigation, resolves disputes more quickly, confidentiality of

dispute resolution, less confrontational, specialized expertise, provides a neutral forum, offers

more flexibility for resolution of disputes, and foreign arbitral awards are often easier to

enforce.24 With respect to online methods of ADR cost reductions should be less than

conventional ADR methods as meeting spaces will not have to be rented, meals will not have to

be provided, travel time and costs are eliminated, and reporting time is reduced because of the

electronic ADR trail and the inherent efficiency having ready access to organized information via

the e-arbitration site. Because of the inherent flexibility of the internet e.g. asynchronous and

ubiquitous disputes should be easier to settle as the internet is an easier venue to organize for

meeting and communication purposes. As well, it may be argued that internet based ODR could

be considered a less confrontational venue when disputants are hostile toward each other and will

not mix well if physically present in a conventional arbitration or mediation venue. Furthermore,

the use of online discussion forums and chatrooms, much like emails allows individuals in

sensitive matters of conflict and dispute to reflectively review and craft their communications

carefully before they are submitted to the electronic venue being used in ODR cases. Although, it

can also be pointed out that with online venues the face to face component is most often missing

(teleconferencing and Skype (live video cam communications) and when face to face interaction

is missing in interpersonal communications there can be room for misunderstandings as one is

not able to interpret body posture, gestures, tones, etc.. that can send forms of messages and

information to observant arbitrators, mediators and disputants in conventional ADR cases.

24 Id.
Having said that, ODR facilitates more communications inherently because of its asynchronous

and ubiquitous features and because participants are readily able to review with accuracy what

has been posted electronically in response to questions and statements of facts in the ODR

process. While typically ODR and the internet are viewed as potentially less confidential than

conventional ADR approaches25, there are indeed many electronic techniques and processes that

can be used to ensure confidentiality. Consumers are relying on commerce security and

confidentiality on a daily basis when they submit their credit card and personal information on

secure sights. As such the technology is readily available to implicitly build security for

confidentiality into an ODR electronic platform. With ODR one would expect that access to

experts would be enhanced because of the breadth of the internets access globally, and again

asynchronousity and ubiquity can be built into the system to allow individuals greater personal

flexibility within their schedules and location to access and participate in the dispute26. Just as

25 “The problems facing online arbitration are similar to the problems facing e-commerce.
Online arbitration must be concerned with unauthorized access, confidentiality, identity
verification, service denial, crash of the system, and viruses…Regarding the strict confidentiality
issue, no e-commerce service provider can guarantee 100% security. But one must keep in mind
that in traditional arbitration proceedings, 100% confidentiality cannot be guaranteed either.
Additionally, one author believes that at least two legal regimes may also protect the
confidentiality of online arbitration: national public laws, which prohibit third-party interception
of electronic communications and private agreements between the parties.” Nicolas de Witt,
“Online International Arbitration: Nine Issues Critical To Its Success”, 12 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb.
441, 2001, p. 462.
26 “Information technologies such as the Internet have four significant effects on
communication and information management in dispute resolution. They make it possible for
anyone to transmit significant quantities of information to anyone else over virtually any distance
instantaneously. They make it possible for disputants to communicate interactively without being
present in the same place. They make it possible for participants to communicate
asynchronously, that is, without being connected to the system at the same time. They facilitate
the storage, retrieval, review and reuse of existing information.” Frank A. Cona, “Application of
Online Systems in Alternative Dispute Resolution”, Buffalo Law Review, 1997. See “Modern
Legal Framework”.
with conventional ADR presumably ODR will similarly provide a neutral forum (arguably ODR

could be even more neutral as a forum than conventional ADR methods as the absence of visual

and physical interpersonal communications may reduce the opportunity for subtle unconscious

biases and prejudices that are induced by cultural differences and intolerances that all

professionals strive to avoid).

One of the more obvious inherent hurdles to broadly accepted online instruction of dispute

resolution (I.e. arbitration and mediation) is the heavy involvement of the legal community and

lawyers as practitioners in the industry. The American Bar Association’s policy under Section

304(f) states that “a law school shall not grant credit by correspondence” and by extension credit

courses are not recognized for law courses completed via the internet for legal licensure

purposes27. As such law schools to maintain standards and accreditation structure their programs

and courses to ensure they satisfy an comply with ABA regulations. Thus there has been no

motivation on synergy for law schools to commit capital or faculty expertise to the development

of online legal training, in particular online ADR instruction of arbitration and mediation.

In a report submitted by The Legal Information Institute (LII), Cornell Law School in 2001

insights are available from an exploratory distance learning in law project that was comprised of

internet based courses in law, undertaken between 1996-1999, as a joint venture by Cornell Law

School, the University of Colorado, Chicago-Kent College of Law and the University of

27 www.aba.com
Kansas;28 and a follow-up LII project consisting of a seven law school consortium29 joint venture

for delivery of two internet based courses in 2000-2001. “The principal difference between these

courses and their predecessor consisted of the substitution of fully asynchronous components for

“real time” exchange. This change freed instruction from the scheduling constraints inherent in

assembling students at the same moment across multiple time zones and academic schedules.

Less obviously, it allowed larger enrollments without loss of interactivity or accountability. This

is in turn, made investment in reusable multi-media content economically feasible.” Notably few,

if any of these law schools had experience in internet-based legal education and this is clear from

the passage above because internet courses typically rely heavily on active student participation

via a discussion forum and/or chat forum with weekly subject matters from the course syllabus

shared in open discourse Socratic style, lead typically by a cluster of questions that all students

must respond to after review of the associated reading material, and as well to promote

interactivity and discourse it is usually expected and built into student evaluations that students

must comment weekly on fellow students postings as well as their own responses to discussion

questions. As such an online classroom is a very busy and interactive communication chamber

where students interact with students and typically the online instructor responds as well to each

original response from each of the respective students to the weekly discussion question. As a

result the norm in the business is that a course designed on the basis described above should not

have any more than 15 students in the class, and certainly it could not be assumed that because

28 Peter W. Martin, “A Report on the LLI’s Two Multi-Law School Courses Conducted in 2001-
2001”, Memorandum, 12/7/2001. www.aba.com
29 Arizona State, Chicago-Kent, Kansas, Rutgers-Camden, Rutgers-Newark, Seattle and
Vermont - with four signing up for each course (Chicago-Kent participated in both). Id.
yteh courses was being delivered online would mean that student enrolment could be increased.

In fact, it is quite the contrary. In an online classroom the instructor is more of a coach on the

side (facilitator) versus a sage on the stage as is customary with law school lecture formats and

many to a lesser extent law seminars.

The basic components of LII’s 2000-2001 distance learning modle delivered via the internet

included:

Ÿ1 “digital readings (with a print-on-demand option)

Ÿ2 Scheduled progression through a sequence of topics paced by Web-based discussion and

mandatory interactive exercises.

Ÿ3 Hypermedia presentation (streaming audio linked to assigned texts and supplementary

materials)*

Ÿ4 Computer-based tutorials and exercises [] tightly integrated with the readings and

presentation material

Ÿ5 Asynchronous but paced teacher-student, student-student written discussion

Ÿ6 Short writing and problem-solving assignments submitted via the Net for teacher

evaluation and feedback

* an end-of-term exam for final evaluation of student performance.”30

The two law courses selected for internet based distance learning in 2000-2001 were: 1)

30 Id.
Introduction to Copyright and 2) Social Security Law.31 95 students took the Fall term Copyright

course and 60 completed Social Security Law in the Spring.32 The course architecture was based

on modularity is a common approach used for online instruction and based on studies conducted

by psychologists employed by Cardean University in constructing its online educational platform

and modular pedagogy it was found that using different communication venues reguires using

different message formats. For instance it was found that attention retention by students online

diminished after one or two screens of data and that excessive scrolling led to less thorough

message communications. Essentially course materials are specifically designed in short modules

and lecture notes, problem illustrations, etc.. are designed to emit no more than an efficient

quantity of information considering the venue in use. The ILL found that students taking these

courses dissatisfaction and frustration usually emanated from one of three sources: “1)technical

problems, 2) specific expectations of what an on-line course would or should be that were not

fulfilled by this one, and 3) the challenge of dealing with digitally-delivered course readings.”33

In contrast it was noted that “students taking these on-line offerings had enormous flexibility in

how they fit the multiple course elements into their weekly schedules. Such control over the

exact time and pace of their learning was, for the students, the most highly valued feature of the

asynchronous course architecture. Not only could students take up a given module when they

were ready and able to focus, they could run it, pause, take notes, and return to puzzling

points.”34 It was that it required was identified that the principal advantage of online course

31 Id.
32 Id.
33 Id.
34 Id.
delivery a short learning curve in adjusting for both teachers and students to the work patterns

and expectations, and that it is useful in creating a highly diverse student body within the course

(students gathering in a virtual classroom can and do come from countries around the world), and

can link faculty members and students whom otherwise may not be able to get together for a

shared learning experience.35

While the US ABA may not recognize online JD or LLM course work for accreditation, the ABA

does stream online courses for continuing learning education (CLE). Recognition of these CLE

distance courses for credit varies by state36. Twenty five states approve ABA-CLE audio cd and

dvd, seven states accept ABA-CLE downloadable CLE for credit and thirty seven jurisdictions

accept ABA teleconferences for mandatory CLE credit.37

Recommendations:

The obvious recommendation that is being asserted in this paper is that it is quite surprising that

with growing numbers of colleges and universities going on-line with courses and programs,

with those already involved expanding their activities and with new providers, who often lack

35 Id.
36 ABA-CLE online courses are generally approved in the following jurisdictions: Arizona,
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, Montana,
Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South
Carolina, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virgin Islands, Washington State, and West Virginia.
www.aba.com
37 www.aba.com
traditional institutional hallmarks are emerging38, that U.S. law schools have not stepped forward

to encourage further innovation in the field of dispute resolution, particularly online ADR to

provide online legal training in arbitration and mediation.

Since in the vast majority of states in the U.S.A., the Juris Doctorate and its tenant courses are

the principal degree program for accreditation and licensure in the U.S. and where as LLM’s,

J.S.D.’s and other graduate programs such as certificate and diploma degrees are non-imperative

from an initial qualifying perspective within the legal profession, and whereas the ABA

recognizes various forms of electronic and distance based courses for CLE accreditation, I

encourage any US law schools or institutions and educators whom may read this research report

to consider taking the lead by introducing an online program of legal study in dispute resolution,

for accreditation by national and state ADR bodies, and for credit as a post graduate legal

program.

Particularly relevant from a course offering perspective would be any course work provided

online with respect to web based commerce (commerce) and international trade where the parties

involved are situated in diverse locations and time zones. Table 3 below provides a sample

course syllabus for an online offering of international commercial arbitration. An online joint

venture with CIArb, University London and the University of Adelaide also has much merit.

38 www.aba.com “Statement of Commitment by the Regional Accrediting Commissions for the

Evaluation of Electronically Offered Degree and Certificate Programs.
 Table 1

ODR Providers
American Arbitration Association (AAA) Intersettle
ADNDRC Iris Mediation
Appellex Bargaining Solutions IVentures
ARyME JAMS
Better Business Bureau Online Mediation Arbitration Resolution Services
(MARS)
Camera Arbitrale di Milano Mediaiton Now
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators The Mediation Room
Cibertribunal peruano MichiganCybercourt.Net
Consensus Mediation ODR.NL
Consumers association of Iceland ODRWorld
Conflict Resolution.com Private Judge
CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution Resolution Forum Inc.
Cyberlaws.Net Resolvemydispute.com
Cybersettle SettleTheCase
Dispute Manager SettleToday
Electronic Consumer Dispute Resolution SmartSettle
(ECODIR)
ElectronicCourthouse.com SquareTrade
Eurochambres The Claim Room
FSM TRUSTe
GWMK The Virtual Magistrate
Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Webmediate.com
iCourthouse World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO)
International Chamber of Commerce

(Source: www.odr.info/providers.php)
 Table 2
Standards (ADR and/or ODR): Source: http://www.odr.info/standards.php
Regulations and Standards for Online Dispute Resolution: A Primer for Policymakers and
Stakeholders - Alan Wiener - Mediate.com

Online Dispute Resolution: Global Issues and Australian Applications - Elisabeth Wentworth,
Banking and Financial Services Ombudsmen Ltd.

American Arbitration Association, Rules and Procedures, Ethics and Standards.

CRI Info, The Conflict Resolution Information Source, ADR - Ethics.

SquareTrade Standards of Practice for Online Dispute Resolution, Adherence to the highest
ethical standards when conducting alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is critical. Due to the
unique circumstances created by providing ADR services online, the SquareTrade Standards of
Practice extend beyond traditional ADR standards

Report to the Commonwealth (Australia) Attorney-General, A Framework for ADR Standards,

National ADR Advisory Council, 2001

TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue Recommendations on Alternative Dispute Resolution

(February 2000)
http://www.tacd.org/ecommercef.html#adr

Consumers International Releases Updated 2001 ODR Report

European Commission Recommendation 98/257/EC. Principles Applicable To The Bodies

Responsible For Out-Of-Court Settlement Of Consumer Disputes

OECD’s Guidelines for Consumer Protection in the Context of Electronic Commerce

http://www.oecd.org/dsti/sti/it/

European Commission Recommendation on the Principles Applicable to the Bodies Responsible

for the Out-of-Court Settlement of Consumer Disputes (98/257/CE)

Global Business Dialogue on Electronic Commerce (GBDe) Recommendations on Alternative

Dispute Resolution (September 2000)
http://www.gbde.org/adr2000.html

BBBOnline Code of Online Business Practices (October 2000)

http://www.bbbonline.org/code/code.asp

Table 3

Prospective Syllabus39
International Commercial Arbitration: Online ADR

Section 1 (Week 1): Introduction - The online instructor and each student will post a brief
personal bio as an introduction and will be expected to reply to at least one of their fellow
students bios to help break the ice and to ’warm’ the online classroom atmosphere for active
future discussion. Then two general discussion questions about what 1. What is Dispute
Resolution? and 2. What is the significance of International Commercial Arbitration?

Section 2 (Week 2): History of Dispute Resolution - students will be requested as an exercise to
search the internet and law school library services for two different examples of the earliest
forms of arbitration and mediation they can identify and to post their findings to the discussion
forum and to respond to at least ine of their classmates similar posting for the week.

Section 3 (Weeks 3 & 4) : Types of ADR: (a) arbitration (b) mediation (c ) med-arb (d)
negotiation (e) fact-finding, (e) Ombuds. In Week 3 students will define and provide a case
reference or example of each (a), (b) and (c ) and as a second task will be asked to comparatively
differentiate between the three. In Week 4 students will be asked if negotiation is an exclusive
form of dispute resolution or not, and how it is differentiated from (a), (b) & (c )? The second
weekly discussion question would ask the students to describe the role of (e) and (f) above in the
dispute resolution process.

Section 4 (Weeks 5 & 6): The Modern Legal Framework for International Commercial ADR: (a)
contract law (b) Procedural Arbitration rules (c ) Domestic Arbitration Law, and (d)
International Enforcement Treaties.

Section 5 (Week 7): (A) Traditional Advantages of ADR; (B) Traditional Disadvantages of
ADR; Students will be asked to post examples for each of (a) and (b) above and to comment on
at least one of their classmates posting for each of the two heads.

Section 6 (Weeks 8-11): Using the Internet to Resolve International Disputes: (a) technical
issues & (b) legal issues. Discussion room questions from these issues will include two per week

39 Author used heads from Cona & de Witt, and added knowledge of online teaching
techniques.
of the following with examples requested and counter commenting on fellow students postings
expected:
1. What form must an online arbitration agreement take?
2. Who should hear the dispute?
3. Where will arbitration occur?
4. What will govern the online international arbitration?
5. Who will pay online arbitration costs and what will they consist of?
6. What time limits will govern online arbitration?
7. What evidentiary rules will govern online arbitration?
8. What form will the award take and how will it be enforced?
9. Is confidentiality feasible and advisable in online international arbitration?

Section 7 (Week 12): Compulsory Arbitration attendance. Each student with cooperation from
the professor will be responsible to organize attendance for a minimum of 3 hours at an
arbitration in a location and issue of their choosing and to report a summary back to the course
discussion forum (2 page maximum). They are expected to respond to at least of one of the
fellow classmates posting on their arbitration attendance experience. Quality observations and
comments that add value to the discussion are expected.

Section 8 (Week 13) Take home examination (essay & multiple choice) will be assigned (due in
one week via email submission). Conclusion and open discussion e.g. suggestions for course
improvements and discussion about the future of ODR. Students will also be provided time for a
confidential course evaluation to submit online to the registrars office.

Student Evaluation:
10. Participation in discussion threads and other online activities – 25% (e.g. 1 point
per discussion question & response to classmate posting for weeks 1 through 11, 1 points
for week 12 and two points for participation in Week 13.
11. Compulsory workshop participation – 20%
12. Essay Assignment (10 page minimum and 20 page maximum) – 25%
13. Examination – 30% (if the school seeks more rigor a 3 hour synchronous online
exam can be scheduled instead of the take home version proposed).

Course Materials:
A listing of online ADR links will be developed and provided as a portal in the class site. Also
digital lecture notes, readings and text chapters will be provided for each section as appropriate.
It is also highly encouraged that video content and short modular style electronic presentations
e.g. slides, animations, etc.. be incorporated in the materials as well.

Other: Students will be encouraged but not required to use Skype or other alternative video-cam
and audio communications during their online class discussions when engaged with classmates
who are online in the discussion forum at the same time.
Note: All Law school and university student guidelines, rules, regulations and policy on student
behavior and ethics apply. Consult the Student Handbook when in doubt. Enjoy the course!