Acceso a la justicia, cultura y online dispute resolution
Resumen
A lo largo de las últimas décadas, es innegable el avance experimentado por el discurso procesal civil con respecto a los medios alternativos de resolución de conflictos (alternative dispute resolution o ADR). En este sentido, es recurrente que este aspecto sea comparado con la garantía de acceso a la justicia, al verificarse la compatibilidad entre ambos elementos. El presente estudio trata de analizar esta cuestión, observando específicamente la posibilidad de que los medios de online dispute resolution (ODR) desempeñen un papel no solo pertinente sino también creciente e inevitable en nuestra realidad. Ello se hace teniendo en cuenta, especialmente, la naturaleza de la cultura del proceso civil y de sus postulados.
Referencias bibliográficas
Andrews, N. (2012). The Three Paths of Justice: Courts Proceedings, Arbitration and Mediation in England. Cambridge: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2294-1
Arenhart, S.C. (2013). A tutela coletiva de interesses individuais: para além da proteção dos interesses individuais homogêneos. São Paulo: RT.
Arenhart, S.C. & Osna, G. (2019). Curso de processo civil coletivo. São Paulo: RT. Auerbach, J.S. (2007). Justiça sem direito. En A.A. Gomma & I.M. Barbosa (Eds.), Estudos em arbitragem, mediação e negociação. Brasilia: Universidad de Brasilia.
Barret, J.T. & Barret, J.P. (2004). A History of Alternative Dispute Resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bone, R.G. (2003). The Economics of Civil Procedure. Nueva York: Foundation Press.
Brett, J.M. et al. (2007). Sticks and Stones: Language, Face and Online Dispute Resolution. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 85-99.
Bush, R.A.B. & Folger, J. (2005). The Promise of Mediation: The Transformative Approach to Conflict. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Cappelletti, M. & Garth, B. (1978). Access to Justice: The Newest Wave in the Worldwide Movement to Make Rights Effective. Buffalo Law Review, 27, 181- 292.
Chase, O.G. (2014). Direito, cultura e ritual (Trads. S.C. Arenhart y G. Osna). São Paulo: Marcial Pons.
Chiovenda, G. (1922). Principios de derecho procesal (Trads. J. Casais y Santalo). Madrid: Editorial Réus.
Consultor Jurídico (19 de setiembre de 2018). Mercado livre lança plataforma online para resolução de disputas. Recuperado de
https://www.conjur.com.br/2018-set-19/mercado-livre-lanca-plataforma-online-resolucao-disputas
Cortés, P. (2011). Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers in the European Union.
London: Routledge.
Delgado Suarez, C. (2013). O panorama atual e a problemática procedimental em torno da tutela inibitória. Revista de Processo, 38(226), 283-321.
Durkhéim, E. (2007). As regras do método sociológico (Trad. P. Neves). São Paulo: Martins Fontes.
Evans-Pritchard, E.E. (1976). Withcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fouchard, P. et al. (1992). On International Commercial Arbitration. Boston: Kluwer Law International.
Galanter, M. & Lande, J. (1992). Private Courts and Public Authority. Studies in Law, Political, Society, 12, 393-415.
Galanter, M. (1975). Why the «Haves» Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change. Law and Society Review, 9, 95-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053023
Gilley, B. (2006). The Meaning and Measure of State Legitimacy: Results for 72 Countries. European Journal of Political Research, 45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00307.x
Hensler, D.R. (1999). A Research Agenda: What we Need to Know About Court-Connected ADR. Dispute Resolution Magazine, 15. Recuperado de https://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP871.html
Katsch, E. (2006). Online Dispute Resolution: Some Implications for the Emergence of Law in Cyberspace. Lex Electronica, 10. Recuperado de
Macneil, I.R. (1992). American Arbitration Law: Reformation, Nationalization, Internationalization. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Mancuso, R.C. (2014). A resolução dos conflitos e a função judicial no contemporâneo Estado de Direito. São Paulo: RT.
Mancuso, R.C. (2011). Acesso à justiça: condicionantes legítimas e ilegítimas. São Paulo: RT.
Mania, K. (2015). Online Dispute Resolution: The Future of Justice. International Comparative Jurisprudence, 1(1), 76-86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icj.2015.10.006
Marinoni, L.G., Arenhart, S.C. & Mitidiero, D. (2019). Curso de processo civil. Volumen 1. São Paulo: RT.
Osna, G. (2017). Processo civil, cultura e proporcionalidade: análise crítica da teoria
processual. São Paulo: RT.
Poblet, M. (ed.) (2011). Mobile Technologies for Conflict Management Online Dispute Resolution, Governance, Participation. Londres: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1384-0
Resnik, J. (1995). Many Doors? Closing Doors? Alternative Dispute Resolution and Adjudication. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 10(2), 211-265.
Rhode, D.L. (2004). Access to Justice. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Rule, C. (2002). Online Dispute Resolution for Business: B2B, E-Commerce, Consumer, Employment, Insurance, and Other Commercial Conflicts. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Taruffo, M. (2009). Cultura e Processo. Rivista Trimestrale di Diritto e Procedura Civile, 63(1), 63-92.
Van Loo, R. (2016). The Corporation as a Courthouse. Yale Journal on Regulation, 33, 547-602. Recuperado de
Wang, F.F. (2009). Online Dispute Resolution: Technology, Management and Legal Practice from an International Perspective. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
