Online dispute resolution and Artificial Intelligence could revolutionise the Irish courts system, leading to fewer judges and faster and cheaper disposal of cases, a High Court judge has said.
People already get divorced online in the UK, and using Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in non-contentious divorce cases here would remove many such cases from courts, said Mr Justice Max Barrett, the author of a new book on ODR.
The experience in the US is that, to succeed, ODR needs drive from within the judiciary, he said.
The particular challenge for court systems is, if they do not move with the times, “they may find themselves increasingly supplanted by an ODR system for which there is a clear global demand”, Barrett said in his just-published book, Online Dispute Resolution: Law’s Future in the Digital Age, written in his personal capacity.
ODR “is inescapable”, he said. The US has developed mature, court-connected ODR for routine disputes, offering a “workable paradigm” for other democracies. The online dispute resolution system is also well-developed in Canada and its use is growing in the UK.
The Council of Europe has prioritised the human-rights dimension of ODR, he notes, while China, a “pioneer” in ODR, has rolled out centralised, large-scale ODR platforms.
The Beijing Internet Court has an ‘AI judge’ with a human image, voice and facial expressions. Its role is to assist human judges by completing repetitive basic work, freeing them to focus on the challenges of trial work.
China’s integration of AI, big data and automation “allows for unparalleled efficiency”, the book states.
The distinction between ODR and the system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is that ADR has traditionally referred to flexible methods, such as arbitration and mediation, for resolving disputes alongside or completely outside the court system, Barrett writes.
The common misconception that ODR is merely ADR conducted with the help of technology “fundamentally underestimates” the transformative potential of ODR.
ODR, he says, integrates cutting edge technologies, including AI and machine learning, to automate processes, provide tailored solutions and create curated platforms “that serve as tools of justice”.
Litigation can be “prohibitively expensive” and ODR, Barrett suggests, can make justice more affordable and accessible, especially for poorly resourced litigants facing delays and costs in the traditional system.
Reduced travel and legal costs will lower barriers to entry, online systems can simplify procedure for self-represented parties and ADR/ODR can ease backlogs, freeing courts for complex cases.
ODR “involves a fundamental reimagining of justice in the digital age”. Unlike ADR, which is primarily reactive, ODR has potential to be proactive, helping parties to avoid disputes altogether or helping to contain disputes before they escalate.
“This shift is not merely about efficiency or cost, though it can assist with both; it redefines the very nature of access to justice.”
The OECD, he said, recently remarked that ODR has “significant potential to enhance access to justice”.
Trust in ODR, he said, depends heavily on secure systems and careful use of automation, “strong cybersecurity measures are critical for ODR platforms”.
ODR, when coupled with the “inevitable” permitting of an element of AI in crafting judgments for cases that require a human judge, will see Ireland end up with a “radically different” court system from the present quasi-Victorian system, he said.
For now, he said, AI-assisted judgments still require “careful human screening”.
AI can handle high-volume, low-complexity disputes quickly but concerns include algorithmic bias and opaque decision-making. Safeguards and human oversight are “essential” to maintain trust.
By doing repetitive and predictable tasks, AI frees human judges to concentrate on more complex and nuanced issues, says Barrett. AI can also analyse vast amounts of data to identify patterns.
Online Dispute Resolution: Law’s future in the Digital Age is published by Globe Law and Business Ltd, UK. All author royalties go to the Red Cross’s Ukraine appeal.