191
CHAPTER - 10
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
MECHANISM-FOLLOWING
UNCITRAL TNODR AND ALIBABA
EXPERIENCE
Zhang Juanjuan*
I INTRODUCTION
The world's largest one-day online sale, 11.11 Global Shopping Festival of 2016,
has generated RMB 120.7 billion ($17.79 billion) in gross merchandise volume in
just 24 hours over Alibaba's e-commerce platforms - mostly on B2C site Tmall.com
and C2C site Taobao Marketplace. It has generated 657 million delivery orders and
covered 235 countries and regions. 1 With the economic globalization and
construction of "One belt, one road", the development of Chinese internet and
e-commerce has shown a vigorous trend. According to iResearch Global, in 2014,
Chinese e-commerce market transaction amount totally amounted to RMB12.3
trillion, which has surpassed USA to be the biggest global internet retailing market.
In 2015, the amount has been up to RMB16.4 trillion.2
The increasing of the transaction amount will inevitably lead to the increase of
disputes. From 10 days after 11.11 of 2016, government department of Hangzhou,
* PhD. Researcher, Faculty of Law, University of Macau, China.
1 "11.11 Mega-Sale Breaks Rmb 120 Billion Gmv"
accessed 15 November 2016.
2 "2015 Development Condition of Different Sub-sector of E-commerce in China"
accessed 15 November 2016.
192 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Shenzhen and Shanghai has respectively received the 1561,
3
5684 and 2215 claims
concerning 11.11 activity, which are only about complains in 11.11 and in several
cities. Statistics of China E-Commerce Research Centre (CECRC) showed, in 2015,
totally, China e-commerce complaint and right protection public service platform6
has received more than 100,000 complains, among which online purchase accounted
for 43.74%, cross-border online purchase accounted for 7.53%.7
(Figure 1).
Figure 1 Distribution Condition of Complaints from Different Platform in 2015
Sources from: CECRC, 2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints
Monitoring of China E-commerce, 10 March 2016; available at:
.
In this e-commerce booming times, the traditional disputes settlement
mechanism is not suitable because of the far distance and great amounts of internet
disputes, aspects of manpower, material resources and financial capacity.
Accordingly, in the field of international law, online dispute settlement (ODS)
mechanism emerged, combining with the information technology and traditional
3 "Complaints Statistics Concerning 11.11"
accessed 15 November 2016.
4 "Complaints Concerning 11.11 in Shenzhen is 48% Plus than the Last Year"
accessed 15 November
2016.
5 "The False Advertisement of 11.11 is Concentrated in Shanghai"
accessed 15 November
2016.
6 accessed 15 November 2016.
7 CECRC "2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints Monitoring of China
E-commerce" (10 March 2016)
accessed 15 November 2016.
Online
purchase,
43.74%
Life service,
24.05%
Cross-border
purchase
online, 7.53%
Internet …
B2B, 2.63%
Wechat
Business,
2.51%
Business by
Mobile
Phone, 1.85%
Logistics
Expreses,
1.09%
Others,
10.84%
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 193
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR),
8
to adapt to the development of the
big-amount and low-value cross-border e-commerce. Under this circumstance, how
to establish a reasonable, convenient and efficient ODS mechanism is significant.
Currently, there are three channels in China: e-commerce internal platform, online
court and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), among which, e-commerce internal
platform operates well, while ODR has met many challenges. Some experiences
from e-commerce internal platform could be a reference when developing ODR in
China.
In response to the sharp increase of online cross-border transactions worldwide,
UNCITRAL has also made some contributions for resolving disputes arising from
cross-border low-value sales or service contracts concluded using electronic
communications. On Forty-ninth session (27 June-15 July 2016) of UNCITRAL,
Online dispute resolution for cross-border electronic commerce transactions:
Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution (TNODR) published, which also has
been adopted by the General Assembly of UN on 13 December 2016.
9
It
concentrates on ODR and could also supply a reference to China to create ODR
mechanism.
The paper will briefly examine the 3 channels of China on ODS system. Through
some quantitative and qualitative analysis, as well as the cases study, to evaluate the
current situation of cross-border ODS mechanism in China. The paper intends to
make the reader better understand the Chinese style online dispute settlement
modes, evaluate the performance of different ODS methods in China, point out the
obstacles and challenges of ODR in China, and to find some directions with the
reference of UNCITRAL TNODR and Alibaba experience in context of Electronic
World Trade Platform (eWTP).
8 ADR supplies the theoretical bases of ODR, computer technology provides an online environment
affecting. See Douglas Walton and David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute
resolution" (2005) 13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273-295, 274.
9 General Assembly of UN, 'Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 13 December 2016'
UN Doc A/RES/71/138 (19 December 2016) assessed 15 January 2017.
194 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
II EXISTING CHANNELS AND STANDARD RULES OF ODS
MECHANISM OF CHINA
Figure 2 Existing channels and standard rules of online dispute settlement mechanism of China
The three channels of ODS in China respectively are: e-commerce internal
platform, online court and ODR with the interference of the third party. (Figure 2).
2.1 E-Commerce Internal ODS Platform: Taking Alibaba as the Example
E-commerce internal ODS mechanism is called "dispute settlement system with
the intervening of the civil third party in connection with the parties".
10 Some
e-commerce platform itself supplied the civil settlement system when the transaction
dispute happened internal of the platform. It conforms to the characteristics and
needs of the transaction online, digests many online transaction dispute of
low-value, which not only maintain the stability and credibility of their own
platform, but also are helpful to protect the legitimate interests of the parties.
Alibaba,
11 being the most excellent and biggest e-commerce platform, has
established a well operated ODS mechanism. Among Alibaba Group, Taobao and
Tmall respectively concentrate on C2C and B2C market. The following will take
them as the example to analyse the category of the concrete dispute settlement
methods and its characteristics.
10 Luo Xiulan "A Study on the Disputes Settlement Mechanism in Online Transactions – Based on
the Visual Angle of Complementation between Folk Law and State Law" (2010) 8 Hebei Law
Science 57-64, 60.
11 Alibaba is the well-known pioneer of e-commerce, which has the world biggest B2B market –
Alibaba, world biggest C2C market – Taobao, biggest domestic B2C market – Tmall, and the most
excellent pay instrument – Alipay. It is the most advanced internet comprehensive market in the
world. Through the development of many years, it has established its comparatively perfect legal
system.
China ODS
Mechanism
Internal Disput
Settlement Platform of
E-commerce
Negotiation
Intervened by
the staff of
the Ecommerce
Public
Review
Report
online
Online Litigation
ODR
Negotiation Mediation Arbitration
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 195
In order to solve online disputes, Alibaba has published a series of regulations,
including: Taobao Rules, 12 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, 13 Tmall
International Dispute Resolution Rules,
14 Trade Dispute Rules,15 and Convention
on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation),
16 etc. Besides, Alibaba has set up
various online platforms
17 to solve disputes. All those rules have no application
restriction on where the parties are located. In fact, in the Big Data times, sometimes,
it's difficult to tell the pure domestic transaction or cross-border one, and most of the
rules could be applicable to all transactions.
Basically, there are 4 ways to solve the online dispute according to Taobao rules.
Tmall has the same procedure: negotiation between the parties; Custom service
intervention; Public Review system; and Report online.
Figure 3 The procedure of Taobao dispute settlement mechanism
12 "Taobao Rules" accessed15 November 2016.
13 "Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement" accessed 15 November 2016.
14 "Tmall International Dispute Resolution Rules accessed 15 November 2016.
15 "Trade Dispute Rules" accessed 15 November 2016.
16 "Convention on Taobao Public Review" (Trial Implementation) accessed 15 November 2016.
17 Including "Taobao Rules"' accessed 15 November 2016; 'TMALL
Rules'
accessed 15 November 2016; "Alibaba Rule Centre"
accessed 15 November 2016; "Taobao
Judgment Centre" accessed 15 November 2016.
196 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Sources from: .
2.1.1 Negotiation between the parties
If a transaction disputes happened, according to "autonomy" principle, it is
possible to choose negotiation to resolve the disputes. Other than negotiation it is
possible to seek Taobao consumer service intervening, public review system or
choose other alternative method.18 The choice should be made after the application
of refund, (Figure 3) ie the starting point of the application of Taobao Rules of
Dispute Settlement is the buyer's application to refund through Taobao platform.
2.1.2 Taobao Consumer Service Intervening
The status of Taobao consumer service is equal to the neutral third party in
mediation and its decision is non-binding. There are 3 ways to initiate the
intervening of Taobao consumer service: 1) 3 days after the submission of refund
request, and the seller did not negotiate with the buyer; 2) the parties failed to meet
the agreement, the buyer could enter the right protection channel after 3 days of the
refund request; or 3) If the transaction has been finished, the consumer found
aftersales serviced is needed, he can submit the appropriate complaints in 15 days
after the end of the transaction for the reasons such as delay to delivery, violation a
promise, etc (Figure 3). The parties should submit the evidences, which include:
photos of the goods, chat records of Aliwangwang, record on Taobao concerning the
transaction procedure, etc. Although the decision made by the consumer service is
non-binding, Taobao could directly take action against the seller and force the seller
enforce the decision by the private implementation measures. If the consumer is not
satisfied with the decision, he could find other relief method such as litigation or
arbitration. At the same time, if the seller is not satisfied, he could appeal to Taobao
in 15 days since the decision is made by the consumer service.
2.1.3 Public Review System
Being the biggest e-commerce platform, Tabao not only faced the problem of
great disputes, but the difficulty of fairness. Taobao has found that majority of the
disputes are not complex, so that sometimes a common person could make the
decision to support a party according to his own experience. Furthermore, the
knowledge, time and method of the Taobao consumer service are limited. Therefore,
Taobao created the public review system and Taobao Judgment Centre,
19 which can
18 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 3 and art 100.
19 accessed 16 November 2016.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 197
let the members participate in review of the dispute, save the waiting time for both
parties, make the decision comparatively fairer.
In 3 contexts, a public review could be launched. After the failure of negotiation,
the buyer could choose Taobao consumer service intervening or public interview
system, and the latter also could be initiated by Taobao if necessary, or launched by
the seller under circumstances that the seller is dissatisfied with the decision that was
decided by Taobao according to the report of the consumer. The whole public review
team is constituted of 31 reviewers, selected by the platform at random.
20 In 168
hours,21 any party gets at least 16 support votes will win, and an effective final
decision has been constituted; however, if no party gets 16 votes, Taobao consumer
service will intervene.
22
2.1.4 Report to Taobao
With the rapid development of Taobao, the diversified commodity composition
and pluralistic business model has made Taobao platform close to a social
ecosystem. When contributed to transactions among consumers and merchants, the
ecosystem also bred many irregularities. Although Taobao has devoted great efforts
to refine the market environment, it can't fundamentally solve the violation
phenomenon. To more rapidly and effectively prevent unfair competition, Taobao
established the Report platform23 to delegate netizens to report the irregularities to
Taobao and let the social power to participate the platform governance, in order to
construct a fairer and more just e-commerce platform order. Taobao will investigate
the report in 7 days and make a decision. If the seller is dissatisfied with the result, he
can apply for the public review. The creation of Report to Taobao could not only
effectively prevent unfair competition, but also protect the members from being
damaged in advance. Moreover, through active regulatory and socialized
governance, it could make up for the deficiency of the platform on the time limit to
find the irregularities, and help the platform continuously perfect and renovate the
rules.24
20 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 9.
21 Ibid art 10.
22 Ibid art 11.
23 accessed 16 November 2016.
24 Alibaba Group "Alibaba Ecosystem Internet Volunteers Research Report 2016" p 6
accessed 15 November 2016.
198 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
2.2 Online Court: Taking Zhejiang Online Court as the Example
Litigation is the ultimate authority in dispute settlement, which has been expected
as the "fairest" method. The good utilizing of litigation system is inevitable to curb
the dispute production and promote the success of the dispute settlement. Electronic
court or online court is not just to apply some internet technology in judicial
activities,
25 but the model that all trials and relevant litigation activities are
conducted through electronic communication method, which is a new court form in
e-times with the overall merging of the trial and information technology.26 Online
court could not only facilitate the consumers and other e-commerce participant to
protect their rights rapidly, but also take advantage of Big Data to promote the
transparency of the judiciary. China has also made an attempted in some pilot courts.
China Civil Procedural Law and its judicial interpretation, Contract law and
Electronic Signature Law have confirmed the legality of the legal instruments in
electronic form and the evidence transferred in electronic form, as well, the trial with
the internet video technology is also permitted. The province or city with a
developed internet transaction could be the pilot, with the independent online trial
team and the specific technology persons.27 Therefore, being the province where the
leader of Chinese e-commerce platform, Alibaba is located, Zhejiang province has
become the first pilot to fully utilize the modern information technology to promote
judicial efficiency. In 2015, Zhejiang Supreme People's Court has focused on the
establishment of e-commerce online court.
28 Until now, there are totally 14 basic
level people's courts29 have involved in online trial and 13 types of cause of action.30
25 Long Fei "Development Condition and Future Prospect of China ODR" (2016) 10 Journal of Law
Application 2-7.
26 Zhou Ziyu, Quan Quan and Chang Bai, 'Online Court: Trial Model in Internet Times' (2014) 06
Journal of Law Application 103-107.
27 Luo Xiulan (n 10) 57-64.
28
accessed 15 November 2016.
29 14 Online courts in Zhejiang province includes Binjiang People's Court, West Lake People's
Court, yuhang People's Court, Yiwu People's Court, Taizhou Luqiao District People's Court,
Lishui Suichang People's Court, Lishui Liandu District People's Court, Taizhou Huangyan District
People's Court, Wenzhou Lucheng District People's Court, Quzhou Qujiang District People's
Court, Maanshan Yushan District People's Court, Hangzhou Xiacheng District People's Court,
Jinyun People's Court, Lishui Yunhe People's Court. Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court is the
appealing court.
30 13 categories of cause of action of Zhejiang online court are: e-commerce transaction, copyright,
credit card, alimony, trademark, marriage and family, financial loan contract, folk loan,
e-commerce small amount loan, traffic, contract, property insurance contract, aliment.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 199
The concrete procedure of online court is the same with the offline litigation,
restrictedly to comply with the Civil Procedural Law. It depends on the internet
service platform and moves every step, such as launching a lawsuit, accepting a case,
burden of proof, trial and judgment, to be completed online, which resulted in
promoting trial efficiency and save the judicial sources.31 Besides, other local courts
in China are also actively promoting the establishment of electronic court.
Additionally, at present, Chinese courts are actively transforming and upgrading
to set up informationization 3.0 of the People's Court, which focuses on data, to
make it a foundation of the future overall online court. Since 2014, China Supreme
People's Court (SPC) built China Judicial Process Information Online to disclose
various judicial information,
32 China Judgement Online to publish judgments,
33 the
trial broadcast live platform to broadcast live all open trial of SPC through the
Internet,
34 China Implementation Information Disclosed Online to disclose
information on the lists of dishonest persons subjected to execution, implementation
procedure, and the relevant legal instruments.35 All local courts have linked with the
above platforms. All of these activities are preparing for the future online court,
which would be intelligent, opening-up and transparent.
2.3 Online Dispute Resolution
Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is a new way developed on the basis of the
traditional ADR with the help of information technology, which would allow all of
the participants to communicate without the restriction of space and time.
UNCITRAL defines "ODR" as a solution which can assist the parties in resolving
the dispute in a simple, fast, flexible and secure manner, without the need for
physical presence at a meeting or hearing, which includes but not limited to
ombudsmen, complaints boards, negotiation, conciliation, mediation, arbitration and
others.36 Now, ODR has developed in countries where online transaction has been
prosperous, which is the important method to solve the domestic or international
online transaction disputes for its flexibility, convenience, cheapness, speciality and
justice. Chinese ODR system is at the beginning of establishment, which includes
31 accessed 17 November 2016.
32 accessed 18 November 2016.
33 accessed 18 November 2016.
34 accessed 18 November 2016.
35 "Implementation in the Sunshine is Powerful" accessed 18 November 2016.
36 Part II, Section 1, 2, TNODR.
200 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
online negotiation, arbitration and conciliation with the participation of third party.
Some ODR platforms supply a specific service, while others supply different ODR
methods and the concrete one would be decided by the party. Most of the ODR
platforms in China haven't distinguished the domestic or cross-border transaction.
2.3.1 Online Negotiation
Online negotiation, the other name is "online conciliation", refers to negotiation
with the utilizing of internet technology, which is often the basis of other methods. 37
Through the private communication between the parties, many disputes would be
solved economically. It's a kind of self-help way and especially plays an important
role in low-value transactions. It is different from the online negotiation of Taobao,
because the platform of online negotiation of ODR is independent from both parties;
while the latter has the interests with both parties.
In China, the representatives of the specific online negotiation platform are China
Consumers Association Complaint, Conciliation and Supervision Platform (CCA
Platform),
38 and some local ones such as Pudong New Area Zero Power Dispute
Coordinate Service Platform (Pudong Platform).
39 The former is a right protection
website created by China Consumers Association (CCA), with the intention of
setting up a way "to consult and conciliate with business operators"
40 regulated in
Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and
Interests. Pudong Platform is an e-commerce trusted environmental portal and a
third party public service platform, charged by Shanghai Pudong New Area
Commerce Commission and Pudong E-commerce Sector Association. According to
the delegation of the government, the platform is to establish a trusted transaction
environment and supply the fundamental service for the e-commerce.
2.3.2 Online Mediation
Online Mediation refers to a neutral third party be the mediator to solve the
dispute in a confidential online chatroom or online video meeting. Presently, few
specific platform supplies the ODR mediation service and most of them are
combined with online arbitration, which can give the consumers more choices.
37 Douglas Walton and David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute resolution" (2005)
13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273–295, 275.
38 accessed 18 November 2016.
39 accessed 18 November 2016.
40 Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests,
Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, Order No 7 of the President of the People's
Republic of China (25 October 2013), art 39 (1).
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 201
Generally, the website which supplies the online mediation will publish its rules and
procedures on its platform. After well understanding the rules, the consumer can
submit a mediation application to the platform, which will confirm whether the
respondent is willing to participate in the online mediation. If there is a consent, the
parties will choose the mediators, just like the traditional mediation procedure, or the
platform appoints the mediator.
The representatives of online mediation is Shenzhen Zhongxin E-commerce
Transaction Safeguard and Promotion Centre (Zhongxin Centre), which is delegated
by the government and established by Shenzhen Market Regulatory Bureau and
Futian District Government.
41 The platform particularly created Shenzhen
Cross-border E-commerce Credible Transaction Security System to solve
cross-border e-commerce transaction. Through services of online consultation,
online complaint, online mediation, consumer precaution and guidance, and credit
evaluation, Shenzhen Zhongxin Centre has got certain achievements to help the
consumers to smoothly solve the disputes out of court.
2.3.3. Online Arbitration
Being a dispute resolution method, the operation rules and judgment principles
are similar between online arbitration and traditional arbitration. The main
difference is that the carrier and method to transfer the information of online
arbitration is the Internet.
On basis of whether the arbitration award has the judicial enforceability, some
scholar divided the online arbitration into 2 categories: binding and non-binding.42
Binding online arbitration is conducted by the government arbitration institutions,
which refers to the award that has the judicial enforceability and confirmed by the
national law. Its effect is equal to the legality of traditional arbitration; non-binding
is not conducted by the government arbitration institution, which means the award is
not recognized by the laws, without the judicial enforceability. The effect of
non-binding award is similar to a contract.
43 According to China Arbitration Law,
41 accessed 18 November
2016.
42 Li Hu Research on Online Arbitration (Beijing, China Democracy and Law Press, 2005) 32.
43 Gao Wei "Legal Analysis on Non-Binding Online Arbitration to Solve E-commerce Dispute"
(2012) 2 Academic Journal of Zhongzhou 76-80.
202 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
only arbitration commission44 could be the arbitration institution. Therefore, in
China, only binding online arbitration is permitted.
In December 2000, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration
Commission (CIETAC) established the "Online Dispute Resolution Centre", to
solve the domain disputes online.45 In recent years, CIETAC began to find a way to
solve online e-commerce disputes. In 2009, it promulgated Online Arbitration Rules
of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration, which is the first formal
online arbitration rule in China.46 To rapidly, economically and efficiently solve the
e-commerce disputes in big-amount and low-value, besides the general procedure, it
also sets final procedure47 and expedited procedure48 according to different amount
of the transaction. This is a significant development of China ODR. Pursuant to this
national online arbitration rule, several local arbitration institutions have also
attempted the online arbitration method, such as 2015 Online Arbitration Rules of
China Guangzhou Arbitration Commission,49 Specific Online Arbitration Rules on
Online Transaction dispute in Low-value of China Guangzhou Arbitration
Commission,
50 and 2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules which
also introduced online arbitration articles. 51 Those rules has clarified that the
arbitration agreement could be in forms of data messages, including telegrams,
telexes, faxes, electronic data interchange and emails, etc.,52 and recognized the
validity of electronic signature.53 Therefore, parties of the arbitration could realize
44 Chapter II, Arbitration Commissions and the Arbitration Association, Arbitration Law, Standing
Committee of the National People's Congress, 31 August 1994. See also, Susan R Patterson and D
Grant Seabolt Essentials of Alternative Dispute Resolution (2nd ed, Dallas, Pearson Publications
2001) 115.
45 accessed 19 November 2016.
46 accessed 19 November 2016.
47 Online Arbitration Law, Chapter IV.
48 Ibid Chapter V.
49 Online Arbitration Rules of China Guangzhou Arbitration Commission 2015
accessed 19 November 2016.
50 "Specific Online Arbitration Rules on Online Transaction dispute in Low-value of China
Guangzhou Arbitration Commission" accessed 19 November 2016.
51 "2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules" accessed 19 November 2016.
52 Online Arbitration Rules, art 2(7).
53 Ibid art 29.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 203
online arbitration from the signing arbitration agreement to submitting various
evidences, without going to the arbitration institution in person. It's necessary to
indicate that Guangzhou Arbitration Commission has firstly defined that "low-value
online transaction" is under RMB 10,000.
54
Generally, Chinese ODS mechanism has the basic built up. The next question is
whether all of the channels have functioned well.
III COMPARING OF THE PRACTICE CONDITION AMONG
VARIOUS ODS PLATFORMS
In China, the development of different ODS channel is imbalanced. The paper
will access their performance from aspect of speed, procedure, neutrality, fairness,
professionality, validity, expense and popularity. "1" represents the best, "2" is
moderate, and "3" is not so good.
Internal platform of e-commerce ODR Online court
Speed 1 2 3
Procedure 1 2 3
Neutrality 3 1 1
Fairness 3 2 1
Professionality 3 2 1
Expense 1 3
55 2
Validity 3 2 1
Popularity 1 3 2
Table 1 Assessment index of each way to solve online dispute
The time span of different platforms to deal with a dispute is respectively:
56
Taobao or Tmall consumer service and public review, in 7 days after it decided to
intervene in the dispute;
57 CIETAC, the most rapid expedited procedure time is in
15 days after the formation of the arbitration tribunal;
58 Court, summary procedure
54 Specific Online Arbitration Rules on Online Transaction dispute in Small Amount of China
Guangzhou Arbitration Commission, art 2.
55 Here it refers to arbitration, other ODR methods in China are all free.
56 Not every platform has disclosed the settlement procedure rules. Here and the following
comparisons are only about what has been regulated.
57 accessed 3 January 2017.
58 Online Arbitration Rules of CIETAC, art 50.
204 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
in 3 months.59 Therefore, the fast settlement channel is the internal ODS mechanism
of the e-commerce platform, which is one of its biggest advantage.
In fact, the settlement speed is closely related to the complexity of the procedure.
Usually, the simpler of the procedure, the shorter the time spent on solving the
problem. Comparing the three channels, the procedure of Alibaba is the simplest:
consult – apply the intervening of consumer service or public review – submit the
evidence – make final decision; ODR is more complex in 2 folds: (1) although the
negotiation and mediation procedure is similar with that of Taobao, but it's more
difficult to collect evidence, because being the e-commerce platform, all transaction
marks left on Alibaba platform could be directly taken as the evidence. However,
ODR platform is an independent third party, all evidences should be collected by the
parties and submitted to the platform; (2) Online arbitration procedure is the same
with the offline arbitration, which would be more complex than that of Taobao.60
Furthermore, the procedure of online trial should accord with the Civil Procedure
Law, which is the most complex generally.
As for the neutrality, ODR and online trial is much better than that of Alibaba.
The internal ODS mechanism is supplied by the e-commerce transaction platform
itself, the consumer service is the employee of the platform, and the reviewer of the
public review platform is also the buyer or seller from the platform. It's inevitable
that the third party could have more or less interest or relationship with the platform,
which could impact the neutrality of the third party. On the contrary, no matter ODR
or online trial, the mediator, arbitrator or the judge is an independent third party and
more neutral.
The neutrality and independence will influence the fairness of the final decision.
In practice, there are many complaints and blames on the fairness of the consumer
service of Taobao. What could more serious is the corruption problem of consumer
service: from the early disguised means such as reputation forgery and bad
evaluation deletion, to directly obtaining improper benefits such as accepting the
bribe.
61 Since 2012, Taobao has closed many e-commerce shops forever and
launched the judicial procedure, which has the suspected bribery to the consumer
59 China Civil Procedural Law, art 161.
60 The arbitration procedure in China is: arbitration agreement – the claimant apply for the online
arbitration - the form of the online arbitration panel – the respondent make the defence – evidence
submission – arbitrate online – make the decision.
61 "Surprising Internal Investigation of Taobao Corruption"
accessed 2 January 2017.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 205
service.62 However, the third party of ODR and the judge of online trial, which has
no interest with the parties, would be fairer. Combing the consideration of the
professionality and the coercive power, online trial is comparatively fairer than
ODR.
One of the reasons why the consumer service is easy to be involved in the bribery
scandal maybe because there is no specific qualification requirement to be a
consumer service, also, the auxiliary supervision and penalty system is in blank. On
the contrary, it's worthy to point out in Public Review system, to be a reviewer, one
must satisfy with some requirements. No matter the buyer or seller, both can apply
for the reviewer, only if he is a Taobao member and the registration time is up to 1
year, as well as Alipay has verified the real identification (ID) of the reviewers. At
the same time, the buyer and the seller should meet other prerequisites such as
credit, transaction amount and rule compliance condition, etc.,63 which could also
facilitate the reviewer to make a more informed judgment.
As for the expense on low-value disputes, the internal ODS mechanism of the
e-commerce platform and ODR methods, except arbitration, are free. Online court
is RMB 50 for each case if the object sum is under RMB 10,000.64 The most
expensive method is arbitration. In 2014, Online Arbitration Rules of CIETAC has
regulated the calculation method of the case-acceptation fees according to different
involving value of the case, the minimum is RMB 100.
65 Therefore, online
arbitration is the most expensive way to settle low-value e-commerce disputes.
At last, let's check the popularity of different channels in China. In general, the
dispute settlement mechanism of Alibaba has operated well. Although there is lack
of recent statistics, according to Consumer Protection White Book, published by
Taobao in July 2011, in the early half year of 2011, Taobao has accepted and dealt
with 2,631,000 complaints and successfully protected RMB 190,000,000 damages.66
From 25 December 2015 to 25 October 2016, the report platform of Taobao has
attracted more than 800,000 social persons to participate the platform governance
62 "Anti-corruption of Alibaba" accessed 2 January
2017.
63 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 4.
64 Measures on the Payment of Litigation Costs，State Council (19 December 2006), art 13(1).
65 "Arbitration Fee" accessed 19
November 2016.
66 "Taobao Has Conducted 2,600,000 Cases Concerning Consumer Right Protection in the Early
Half Year" accessed 16 November 2016.
206 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
and accumulatively got 4,230,000 report messages through Report to Taobao.
67
Until 26 November 2016, there were 1,026,117 public reviewers to make a judgment
on 2,174,498 cases through public review platform. Comparatively, online trial
cases were much less. From 12 August 2015 to 26 November 2016, Zhejiang
e-commerce online courts have accepted 1,897 cases, among which e-commerce
transaction disputes accounted to 1,052 cases.68 Regarding the cases settled by
ODR, it's surprisingly poor. Viewing the typical cases in CCA, although it has
published some cases, no evidence is shown that they were settled by the CCA
platform. Besides, from 1 March 2013 to 17 July 2014, there were 70 cases solved on
Pudong Platform, and after 2014, no cases were disclosed.69 Additionally, since
April 2014 till now, only 18 cases were solved on the Shenzhen Zhongxin Centre
platform, including 2 cross-border disputes.70 As for online arbitration, there is no
specific number about online arbitration, but the total number of 2005 is 1,968
cases.
71 Although the above statistics is not in the same period, it's enough to get
some preliminary indication of the general trend because of the gigantic difference
among them, that is, in China, the internal ODS system of the e-commerce platform
is the most welcomed.
IV CAUSATION ANALYSIS OF CHINA ODS DEVELOPMENT
STATUS
An impartial, quick, and affordable dispute resolution system can reduce the
uncertainty associated with e-commerce, and enhance confidence in online markets
and trade.72 Comprehensively evaluating the various index according to Table 1, it
seems like online trial should have been the most popular channel in China because
it has got the most No "1". Additionally, in China, there is always a traditional
"Moderate" ideology73 existing. In the assessment, ODR has got the most No "2",
67 Alibaba Group (n 24) 6.
68 accessed 26 November 2016.
69 accessed 18 November 2016.
70 accessed 18
November 2016. See also accessed 18 November 2016.
71 accessed 15 January 2017.
72 Ofir Turel and Yufei Yuan "Online dispute resolution services for electronic markets: a user
centric research agenda" (2007) 5(6) International Journal of Electronic Business 590-603.
73 "Moderate" ideology is a compromise attitude avoid leaning to either side and the "middle" is the
best. It's a Confucian idea and from the famous classic literature "Zhong Yong", written by Zi Si,
in Li Ji. Later, it became one of the life philosophy of Chinese people.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 207
which should have been the most correspondent to Chinese traditional culture. But
the truth is just on the contrary: the internal ODS mechanism is much more
welcomed than other two channels, followed by online court. The main reasons are
as following:
4.1 Scientific Design of Internal ODS System of Alibaba
The huge numbers have shown that the design of this internal ODS system is
scientific, reasonable, low cost and high efficiency.
4.1.1 Modularization of the Platform Design
Taobao has found that under different categories of the commodities, the dispute
causes and settlement results are always in convergence. Through market
investigation and statistics analysis, Taobao summarized the most regular disputes
causes, including commodity damaged; wrong or missed distribution; commodity
needs repair; the commodity is not conformity with the description; quality problem;
and the commodity is not delivered at the promised time, etc. And the settlement
methods are summarized as change; return; and refund, etc. When designing the
dispute settlement procedure, Tabao utilized this kind of modularization method to
give the complainants choice. For the complainant, on one hand, it could save time to
describe what problem he has met; on the other hand, the result could be predicted.
Moreover, it could impel the consumer services to be more professional when they
intervene the disputes.74
4.1.2 Strictly Comply With the Time Limits
Figure 3 shows that each step of the dispute settlement procedure is controlled
with the restricted time. For example, after 3 days of the submission of application of
refund, the buyer could apply for Taobao consumer service intervening, who will
make the decision to intervene the dispute in 2 days and then make the final decision
in 15 days.75 Dispute settlement should comply with this pace, which is also the
important content to safeguard the procedural justice. If any party could not submit
the evidences in the prescribed time, it would fail. However, for ODR, except
arbitration, the time limit is very vague.
74 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Structuring Right Protection
and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Inside and Outside of Court 7-11.
75 "Question on Time Used to Deal with the Dispute by Consumer Service of Taobao"
accessed 16 November 2016.
208 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
4.1.3 Be Coincided With the Characteristics of E-Commerce
According to the comparison, Taobao ODS platform has the characteristics of
high speed, simple procedure and low expense. Its popularity has testified that in
B2C and C2C disputes, efficiency and economy are more important than fairness,
neutrality, professionality and validity, which are just coincided with the
characteristics of e-commerce.
4.1.4 Social Participation to Jointly Construct E-Commerce Ecosystem
Through public review and report to Taobao, Taobao has introduced the social
power, including the excellent buyer and seller to jointly participate the construction
and governance of Ali e-commerce ecosystem. There are so many transactions on
Taobao every day, it's hard to avoid that sometimes the consumer service is not
familiar with the phenomenon. Furthermore, since the evidence principle of Taobao
is "the product and the description are identical on surface",
76 public review could
bring in more knowledgeable person to judge a case. From the justice aspect, the
system utilizes the method of delivering the task to the interviewer at random77 and
challenge system to effectively prevent the reviewer to select cases for his own
interests.78 Moreover, either the buyer or the seller could participate the public
review and report, so it's a good chance to make the market education to the
participant to let them know the causes of the disputes, and then to avoid the
disputes. The most outstanding point is that the system is a way to realize social
cooperative governance.79
Of course, the limitations of the Taobao ODS mechanism is also obvious, such as
the rules are uncertain; the decision has no legal binding; the fact ascertaining
methods are limited;80 the third party to help to settle down the dispute could have
interests with both parties; lack of supervision and regulatory mechanism; the
fairness of the decision is doubtful; 81 and the unreasonable immunity of
responsibility of platform itself,
82 etc. That is just the reason why other channels are
76 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 101.
77 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 9.
78 Ibid art 5.
79 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Structuring Right Protection
and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Inside and Outside of Court 7-11.
80 Zheng Jun "On Development of ODR in China – Taking Taobao Dispute Settlement Model as the
Example" (2014) 20 Legal System and Society 44-45.
81 Luo Xiulan (n 10) 57-65.
82 Zheng Jun (n 80) 44-45.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 209
also necessary. Being a non-independent third party, the internal ODS mechanism
could never substitute other external systems. However, in the context that there are
still no relevant formal e-commerce laws in China, for the characteristics of rapid,
large volume and low value of B2C and C2C transactions, the internal ODS model is
undoubtful the most direct and efficient way to solve online disputes.
4.2 Obstacles and Challenges of ODR Development in China
From the current development situation of ODS, for the merits of economy,
efficiency and flexibility, in China, the internal ODS mechanism of the e-commerce
platform is the most welcomed; and the online court has also been warmed-up with
the advocate of "Internet + Judiciary" reform.83 Only ODR, is not developed well, it
even has the backward tendency. The obstacle and challenge to ODR are more
serious.
4.2.1 Inadequate Legislation
As for internal e-commerce platform, each one has its own rules on dispute
settlement; and although online court has also no specific regulation, there are
relevant procedural laws to be the reference; but in ODR, except the arbitration
institution, others have no specific rules. Therefore, it's difficult to negotiate or
mediate "in the shadow of the law". For the traditional ADR, the disputing parties are
aware of the legal rules governing the area of their dispute. The outcome that the law
will impose if no agreement is reached gives each party a reasonably good idea of its
bargaining position.84 Cortes indicates that "the establishment of a legal framework
in the ODR field for B2C disputes will increase legal certainty, facilitating the
expansion of quality and fair ODR methods."
85 Parties will take the law into
consideration when setting out a strategy in the ADR procedure.86 However, the
legislation of ODR is far from enough to make this kind of negotiation. Online
arbitration has some regulations but still imperfect. In the offline commerce
83 "Convergence and Extension: the Improvement Road of Judiciary Promulgation in Context of
"Internet +'" accessed 15 January
2017.
84 Esther van den Heuvel "Online Dispute Resolution as A Solution to Cross-Border E-Disputes - An
Introduction To ODR", p16 accessed 19
November 2016.
85 Pablo Cortes "Accredited Online Dispute Resolution Services: Creating European Legal
Standards for Ensuring Fair and Effective Processes" (2008) 17(3) Information and
Communications Technology Law 221-237, 224.
86 R Cooter, S Marks and R Mnookin "Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: A Testable Model of
Strategic Behavior" (1982) 11 The Journal of Legal Studies 225-251.
210 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
transaction, due to territorial restriction, even if there are a lot of disputes, the issues
of jurisdiction, applicable law and the enforcement of the award would not often be
challenging. With the continuous development of e-commerce, the consumer could
make transaction with the merchants at every corner of the world. Parties in the
internet environment, especially cross-border transaction, would feel difficult to
solve the problems of applicable law, jurisdiction and enforcement etc., which is not
prescribed in the relevant arbitration regulations.
4.2.2 Limited Acceptance Scope
In China, the ODR platform is very few, no matter the specific ODR supplier, or
traditional mediation or arbitration institutions which could supply ODR service.
Furthermore, usually, ODR platform only accepted cases concerning its member
enterprises, which has restricted the consumers to utilize the platform. As of early
2017 only 48 enterprises were registered on the CCS platform87 and 9 on Pudong
platform.88 As for arbitration, it only supplies binding arbitration, and non-binding
arbitration is illegal in China.
4.2.3 Casual Quit System
Any method to get the jurisdiction over the case needs the consent of both parties.
Except binding online arbitration, as to other ODR methods, if any party is not
willing to utilize ODR, he can retreat from ODR at any time without any cause. This
would make the complaint, who had submitted the acceptance fee, very passive but
with no redress.
4.2.4 Unreasonable Fees
According to 2009 calculation method of arbitration fee made by CIETAC, each
case at least needs RMB 4,000. However, the general online transactions are
low-value. The cost of online arbitration is so high, which is seriously mismatched.
In 2014, it has been changed to minimum RMB 100, which seems that the cost has
been reduced much. However, according to statistics, the involving sum of the
complaint of 2015 in China is respectively: RMB 100 and below accounted for
17.49%; and RMB 100-500 37.57%. (Figure 4) Obviously, 17.49% of the disputes
involving RMB 100 and below would not select online arbitration because the
arbitration fees are over the transaction price or value. 37.57% of the disputes
involving RMB 100-500 may also not firstly select online arbitration, because they
can get effective resolution through the internal mechanism of e-commerce
87 accessed 3 January 2017.
88 accessed 3 January 2017.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 211
platform. That is to say, the online arbitration would not function on over 50% of
complaints.
Sources from: 2015 Report on E-commerce Consumer Experience and Complaint Supervision;
available at: [accessed on 15 January
2017].
On the contrary, other ODR methods are all free. For a platform, it needs funds
for maintenance. Without the continuous financial support, ODR is hard to maintain
its operation. Thus, a more reasonable, appropriate and detailed calculation of ODR
expense is required in any efforts to re-design the system.
Facing the above difficulties and challenges, based on China's national conditions
and the domestic and international experiences, it is better to re-design China ODS
mechanism, especially the ODR.
V ESTABLISH CHINESE ODR FOLLOWING UNCITRAL AND
ALIBABA
Various e-commerce enterprises, business organizations, governmental
institutions and international organization have actively advocated and promoted
ODR. ODR is regarded as the important aspect to guarantee e-commerce safety,
212 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
enhance the consumer's trust and confidence in e-commerce, and establish a good
environment to the development of e-commerce. 89 One of the important
contributions relating to ODR is from UNCITRAL. Since 2010, Working Group III
of UNCITRAL has started its work on ODR. After 6 years of analysis and
discussion, finally the TNODR has been adopted. TNODR is to establish guidance
in the field of ODR relating to cross-border electronic commerce transactions, which
includes low-value sales or service contracts (including B2C transactions)
concluded using electronic communications. TNODR has no binding and the
content is the consensus of its member countries. Besides, UNCITRAL has also
discussed questions about the validity of the arbitration agreement and the
implementation system. Being the member of the UN, China has also submitted its
opinions and suggestions, which would bring the new direction and requirement to
the construction of China ODR. In addition, the internal ODS mechanism of
e-commerce platform, such as Alibaba Group, has supplied many experiences and
innovations to be a good reference to ODR system. Combing the domestic and
foreign experiences, next, the paper attempts to outline some key points concerning
the establishment of China ODR system.
5.1 Settlement Procedure: Negotiation; Facilitated Settlement; Final
Stage
TNODR prescribed the process of an ODR proceeding may consist: negotiation;
facilitated settlement (mainly mediation);
90 and a third (final) stage. The ODR
proceeding may commence when a claimant submits a notice through the ODR
platform to the ODR administrator. The concrete commencing time is that ODR
administrator notifies the parties that the notice is available at the ODR platform.
The first stage of proceedings may commence following the communication of the
respondent's reply to the ODR platform. If the respondent didn't reply in a reasonable
time, or the parties haven't made an agreement through negotiation, or if any party
asked, the second stage namely the facilitated settlement could be initiated. At the
second stage, a neutral is appointed by the ODR administrator and communicates
with the parties to try to achieve a settlement. If the neutral has not succeeded in
facilitating the settlement, it is desirable that the ODR administrator or neutral
89 Ding Ying "Online Settlement of Online Consumer Dispute – Taking Taobao Platform as the
Example" (2014) 2 Wuhan University International Law Review 208-236, 211.
90 Mediation is viewed as a kind of ''facilitated negotiation''. See Susan M Leeson and Bryan M
Johnston Ending it: Dispute Resolution in America (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing, 1988) 133.
See also Patterson and Seabolt (n 44) 53.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 213
informs the parties of the nature of the final stage, and of the form that it might
take.91
Each stage of TNODR is need not be exhausted in order to initiate the next stage,
ie, the party could launch mediation without negotiation, or directly access to the
final stage without mediation, reflecting the flexibility of ODR. Although ADR has
the same characteristic, it can't meet the high requirements of internet world when
internet has gradually penetrated into the legal relationships with its characteristics
such as global, non-centralized management and high autonomy. 92 Under ODR
model, the initiation of any procedure only needs press of some keys in a certain
internet environment. This space and time fragmentation model makes ODR more
flexible and convenient than ADR, and enhances the efficiency of dispute
settlement.
It's worthy to note that TNODR excludes the question of the nature of the final
stage of the ODR process (arbitration/non-arbitration), for there are many arguments
on it. The focus is whether the pre-dispute arbitration agreements are binding on
consumers: countries represented by USA considered it's binding; while countries
represented by EU considered non-binding. For different jurisdiction has different
opinion, Working Group III decided to adopt "two-track" rule to solve the problem:
93
Track I makes the ODR ending in a binding arbitration stage; Track II to the
contrary. Each country should notify to the Secretariat, which track it belongs to.
Once decided, the seller could judge which jurisdiction the consumer belongs based
on the delivery address, to tell which track should be applied to solve the dispute.
Because of diversified opinion concerning the validity of pre-dispute agreement, and
in fact, most cases could be successfully resolved in negotiation and mediation
stage,94 the final TNODR doesn't involve the online arbitration. However, what can
be predicted is that it's impossible to harmonize all countries' attitude on the
question, and two-track system is the best way at present.
91 TNODR, paras 18-21.
92 Xiao Yongping and Xie Xinsheng "ODR: New Model to Solve E-commerce Dispute" (2003) 6
China Legal Science 146-157, 146.
93 Online Dispute Resolution for Cross-Border Electronic Commerce Transactions: Draft Procedural
Rules, para 15.
94 Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) on the work of its twenty-second
session, para 30.
214 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
As for Chinese regulation, either pre-dispute or post-dispute arbitration
agreement is valid,95 so China belongs to Track I. If the consumer is from China,
then the pre-dispute arbitration agreement is valid. When China establishes ODR
system, the track system of UNCITRAL will be a good reference to classify the
consumers in different jurisdiction in order to cope with the potential disputes from
around the world.
5.2 The Third Party Who Helps to Solve the Dispute
ODR can hardly operate without the third party. Here, the third party means all
participants in ODS except the opposing parties. On basis of TNODR and the
practice, the third parties should at least include "technology third party",
"administrator third party" and "neutral third party".
"Technology third party" refers to all electronic and information technology
support required in ODR, including hardware and software environment. Some
scholars have pointed out that code – the number combination of the regulations in
the cyberspace – is the law,96 which has totally transformed the regulation order in
cyberspace. Different with the physical space, the software and hardware make the
cyberspace what it is, also regulate cyberspace as it is.97 Ethan Katsh called it the
"fourth party".
98 However, technology support is the most important composition of
ODR, which "provides both disputants and third parties with unprecedented
procedures and capacities".
99 Technology is the necessary requirement of ODR,
which has created the possibility to fulfil ODR. Technology is already being widely
used as both an assistant and a full participant in the dispute resolution process, 100
95 Arbitration Law, art 16, "An arbitration agreement shall include arbitration clauses stipulated in
the contract and agreements of submission to arbitration that are concluded in other written forms
before or after disputes arise".
96 William J Mitchell City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT
Press, 1995)111; Joel Reidenberg "Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules
Through Technology" (1998) 76 Texas Law Review 553-593; Lawrence Lessig Code: Version 2.0
(Cambridge, Basic Books, 2006).
97 Lawrence Lessig (n 96) 5.
98 Ethan Katsh and Leah Wing "Ten Years of Online Dispute Resolution: Looking at the Past and
Constructing the Future" (2006) 38 University of Toledo Law Review 101-126, 112.
99 Marta Poblet "Introduction to Mobile Technologies, Conflict Management, and ODR: Exploring
Common Grounds" in Marta Poblet Mobile Technologies for Conflict Management (Netherlands,
Springer, 2011) 6.
100 Arno R Lodder and John Zeleznikow "Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute Resolution" in
Mohamed S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh and Daniel Rainey (eds) Online Dispute Resolution:
Theory and Practice, A Treatise On Technology And Dispute Resolution (The Netherlands, Eleven
International Publishing, 2012) 61.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 215
i.e., it not only could facilitate the dispute settlement, but the code and its
self-implementation nature could also breed the ODS mechanism, such as
Smartsettle,101 which could never be realized in an offline environment.
102
"Administrator third party" is the organizer or host of ODR, which would be
responsible to control the whole ODR procedure according to the relevant rules, as
well as regulate and adjust the internet environment. ODR administrator in TNODR
belongs to administrator third party, which is the important facet to guarantee the
procedural justice of ODR. ODR proceeding cannot be conducted on an ad hoc
basis involving only the parties to a dispute and a neutral (that is, without an
administrator).103 Its main functions are: 1. Confirmation: Confirm the receipt of
any communication by the ODR platform;104 2. Notification: Notify the opinions
of parties, and the commencement and conclusion of different stages of the
proceedings;105 3. Disclosure: Publish anonymized data or statistics on outcomes in
ODR processes, in order to enable parties to assess its overall record, consistent
with applicable principles of confidentiality,106 and the information concerning the
neutral party;107 4. Selection and training of the neutral person;108 5. Supervision:
Supervise the activities of the neutral and ensure the neutral conforms with the
standards it has set for itself,109 and in the event of an objection to an appointment
of a neutral, the ODR administrator be required to make a determination as to
whether the neutral shall be replaced;110 6. Coordination: To avoid wasting time,
the administrator could coordinate the whole ODR procedure. ODR administrator
has the power to extend deadlines, in order to allow for some flexibility when
appropriate.111 The administrator third party could be part of the ODR platform. In
101 Fang Xuhui and Wen Yunzhi "Internet + Times: Opportunity to Introduce the 'Fourth Party' of
ODR – Taking Smartsettle as the Example" (2015) 8 Enterprise Economy 101-104.
102 Gao Wei "System Analysis of Internet Dispute Settlement – Two Paths and Society Adoption
Problem" (2014) 4 Peking University Law Journal 1059-1079.
103 TNODR, para 27.
104 Ibid para 31.
105 Ibid.
106 Ibid para 11.
107 Ibid para 42.
108 Ibid paras 13 and 15.
109 Ibid para 16.
110 Ibid para 48(d).
111 Ibid para 32.
216 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
this context, the software and working procedure are set in advance. In fact, it will
partly overlap with the technology third party. The software and hardware
requirements of the network platform would be very high, not only to support the
whole process of the system, but also ensure that the design of the system is
reasonable, scientific and enforceable. However, it's impossible that technology
and administrator totally merged into one. After all, the technology requires the
design, operation, management and repairing by human being. Therefore, the legal
status of administrator third party should be clearly and distinctly reflected.
"Neutral third party" is independent from the opposing parties, technology third
party and administrator third party, who is the assistant to solve the substantial
problems, including the neutral, mediator and arbitrator, etc. Neutral third party is
the biggest difference between ODR and internal ODS mechanism of e-commerce
platform. TNDOR has prescribed the qualification, power and duty of the neutral. It
requires that the neutral has the relevant professional experience as well as dispute
resolution skills to enable them to deal with the dispute in question. However,
subject to any professional regulation, ODR neutrals need not necessarily be
qualified lawyers. 112 Additionally, the neutral should be required to declare his
impartiality and independence, and disclose at any time any facts or circumstances
that might give rise to likely doubts as to his impartiality or independence.113 He is
appointed by the administrator and will intervene the ODR procedure in the second
stage,114 and only one neutral is prescribed for each dispute.115 The main duty of the
neutral is to fairly, independently and effectively communicate with the parties to get
to conciliation,
116 which is to safeguard the substantial justice. If failed, the neutral
will notify the parties the nature and the possible means of the final stage.117
Turning to China, except the online arbitration, most ODS platform of China
has no regulation on the neutral party. Although the content of different platform is
different, the characteristics of the neutral should be at least independent and just,
with the qualification requirements. Moreover, in order to safeguard the procedural
and substantive justice, technology third party, administrator third party and the
neutral third party must cooperate well.
112 Ibid para 47.
113 Ibid para 48(b).
114 Ibid para 40d.
115 Ibid para 48(e).
116 Ibid para 49.
117 Ibid para 45.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 217
5.3 Implementation Mechanism
As mentioned before, the result of negotiation, mediation or non-binding
arbitration award may not be consciously enforced by the parties. If most of the
result of ODR has no binding effect, then this method of dispute settlement would be
of no significance.118 In view of this, many countries have introduced the definition
of "private enforcement mechanism". TNODR has no description on this issue.
However, on the 28 Session of Working Group III of UNCITRAL, they had drafted
Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms and suggested several private
enforcement measures, which could supply some ideas for China ODR enforcement
mechanism. In addition, the private enforcement mechanism of e-commerce
platform such as Taobao has also functioned well in China, which is another reason
why it is more welcomed than ODR.
The working group has not defined "private enforcement mechanisms", while in
the note of Secretariat, it was explained as "an alternative to a court-enforced
arbitration award or settlement agreement, and which can either create incentives to
perform or provide for the automatic execution of the outcome of proceedings".
119
The final target of private enforcement is to urge the failing party in a dispute to
consciously enforce the ODR result or assist him to enforce. Combing the content of
UNCITRAL and Taobao, "private enforcement mechanisms" could include the
following systems:
5.3.1 Incentives to Perform
5.3.1.1 Trustmarks
Working Group III considered the trust marks are similar to quality label, which
could be sold or granted by ODR providers to e-commerce platform or online
merchandise.120 The merchants can let buyers know that they are certified by an
authoritative third party, so that they can get more trusts. The ODR supplier could
also get trustmarks from an independent third party.121 Through their own brand
reputation, or jointly with the government agencies or relevant certification
standards promulgation institutions, ODR supplier could form the social
confirmation and make the relevant standard. The merchants should be required to
118 Xue Yuan "Establishment of On-line Global Dispute Resolution System for Cross-border
E-commerce Transactions" (2014) 4 International Business 95-103.
119 Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms, para 4.
120 Ibid para 20.
121 Ibid.
218 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
promise that when dispute happened, they will utilize ODR to solve the dispute, as
well as subject themselves to the outcome or the decision of the ODR. Doing like
this, the right of the consumers would be safer and the e-commerce platform would
get recognition and preference from the consumers. If the merchant doesn't enforce
the decision of ODR, the trust marks should be cancelled, which would impact its
reputation and make the consumers not willing to purchase there.
Taobao has the similar trust marks system, some are granted by the third parties,
such as food regulatory department or insurance company; some are provided by
Taobao itself. For example, the mark of "consumer protection plan", represents that
if a consumer purchases in the online shop with the trust marks, the consumer will
enjoy the services of "1 false, 3 times compensates", "return and change the product
without any reason in 7 days", "repairing service of digital products in 30 days",
"quality inspection by the third party", and "rapidly delivery product service", etc.122
For these protection guarantees, the seller could choose one or more items and make
the correspondent promises to the buyer.
5.3.1.2 Rating
When the transaction finished, the consumer could voluntarily provide rating to
the merchants. If the consumer is not satisfied with the quality or service of the
merchants, he can make the feedback through the rating system.123 Taobao also does
so. The rating system is connected with the credit level. Each time Taobao
membership successfully makes the transaction, he can make a credit evaluation to
the merchant. The evaluations include "positive", "moderate" and "negative", and
each evaluation will be correspondent with a credit score: "positive" with 1 score;
"moderate" with no score; and "negative" with 1 minus. Being a seller, the credit
level has 20 ranking.
124
ODR must get the trust from the parties. No matter how big advantages of the
platform, if the parties don't trust them, it's impossible for the parties to select ODR
to solve the disputes. As Katsh (2006), the father of ODR, has put it: "Dispute
resolution processes are generally perceived as having a single function, that of
settling problems. What has come to be understood online, perhaps more than it is
offline, is that dispute resolution processes have a dual role, that of settling disputes
122 "How Many Kinds of Safeguard Measures of Consumer Protection Plan"
accessed 21 November 2016.
123 Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms, para 17.
124 "How to Calculate the Credit Ranking of the Seller" accessed 21 November 2016.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 219
and also of building trust."
125 The trust object contains either the ODR mechanism
itself, or some specific ODR platform. Adopting the reputation and rating system, on
one hand, it enhances the transparency of the transaction and facilitates the
consumers to identify the ID of the online merchants and confirm the relevant credit;
on the other hand, it also encourages the merchants to abide by the principle of "good
faith", in favour of them to form into the credit advantage. This method can
positively encourage the merchants, who want to receive the trust marks and high
rating, to actively perform the decision of the settlement mechanism.
Besides the above practice, the ODR rating system could also add the rating on
the implementation condition of the merchants, including whether the merchant
complies with the mediation agreement article; the decision made by the neutral; the
performance of the arbitration award, etc. If the merchant doesn't perform the ODR
decision, the consumer would rate in low score, the merchant's reputation would be
damaged. Generally, the merchant would not choose not to perform the decision for
the reputation pressure, which would greatly reduce the possibility of
non-compliant.
5.3.2 Penalty on the Non-Compliant Behaviour
Sometimes the encouragement method does not work. More severe and direct
way is to take specific measures against the non-compliant merchant and to force the
merchant abide by ODR decision. Working Group III of UNCITRAL made some
suggestions: (i) The non-compliant merchant could be subject to suspension of its
domain name; (ii) Establish and maintain a "merchant black list" and the browsers
marks a merchant as risky (eg, turning the URL red); (iii) To work with marketplaces
(like eBay and Amazon) or payment providers (like PayPal, or MasterCard/Visa) to
suspend accounts of non-compliant merchants; (iv) Fines or potential of loss of
membership could be set up through business associations and chambers of
commerce in order to penalize merchants for non-compliance. 126 All of these
penalty measures could work in conjunction with ratings or trust marks systems
and/or other enforcement mechanisms.127
The punitive measures of Taobao could arise in response to general irregularity
and serious irregularity. As for general irregularity, Taobao adopts the punitive
125 Ethan Katsh "Online Dispute Resolution: Some Implications for the Emergence of Law in
Cyberspace" (2006) 10(3) Lex Electronica 6
accessed 15 January 2017.
126 Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms, para 27.
127 Ibid para 28.
220 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
measure of "score minus + disclose 3 days". If it is a serious irregularity, there are
more types of punitive measures imposed namely: minus scores; shield the shop in a
certain period; restrict the products publication; restrict the shop establishment;
restrict to send emails internally in Taobao; restrict the community function; public
warning; withdraw all products for sale; close the shop; and seize the account, etc.128
All such imposed punitive measures would be disclosed in the seller's information
introduction to warn the prospective buyers and the merchants.
Through the positive encouragement and negative penalty, most of the merchants
will well implement the decisions of the ODR.
5.3.3 Other Alternatives to Secure Enforcement
Besides the conscious enforcement of the seller and the pressure from the
e-commerce platform or ODR platform, the smooth implementation of ODR
decision could turn to other alternatives involving different stake holders. This
method in essence is to extend the application of credit guarantee theories of Civil
law, Mortgage Law and Security Law to ODR implementation field.129 Comparing
with the aforesaid 2 methods, because of the some independent characteristics in the
alternative methods, it could be relatively easier to enforce the outcome of the ODR
process. Working Group III of UNCITRAL only introduced the chargeback and
escrow system. In China and other countries, there are some other experiences.
5.3.3.1 Chargeback
The consumers pay the merchant through credit card company. If the consumer
believes that the merchant has fraud or non-complied, he can apply for the credit
card company to chargeback. Meanwhile, the credit card company is the judge and
decides whether to refund to the consumer according to the statement or evidence
submitted by the consumer.130 However, in author's opinion, this way is not so
practical. First, the credit card company needs a complete judgment standard and
procedure. Visa and MasterCard have made a detailed procedure but the judgment
standard is still uncertain. Second, the credit card itself has the interests with one or
two parties, being the judge, its independence and justice would be in doubt. Third,
the chargeback must be within the scope of decision, which maybe not equal to a full
128 Rule of Taobao, Chapter V.
129 Zheng Shibao "On Compulsory Enforcement Mechanism of ODR Decision" (2014) 185(3) Law
Review 161-169, 165.
130 Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms, paras 35-39.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 221
refund. Moreover, in this process the money would have to be transferred for many
times, which cause the inconvenience of the implementation.
5.3.3.2 Deposit System
Generally, deposit system could be applied in case of money involved or money
measured. When the parties agreed to be subject to the jurisdiction of ODR, they
should pay a certain amount of deposit to the platform. Once any party failed, the
platform will deduce the decided sum directly from the deposit to pay to the
successful party, and the remaining amount would be refunded. Deposit system is
the application of guarantee system of civil law in ODS mechanism.131
The practice of Taobao is a little bit different. The deposit system is only utilized
to the merchants. The seller is required to submit the deposit to Taobao when he
wanted to open a shop there.132 Also, the deposit system could be bundled with the
trustmarks. Only if the merchant pay 1,000 deposits to Taobao, the trustmarks of
"Consumer Protection Service" would be provided to the merchant by Taobao. It is a
kind of implied consent that any disputes happened, the merchant agree to the
jurisdiction of Taobao. When the consumer found any problem about the
commodity, the consumer could ask for the right protection. Once the consumers
succeed, Taobao will deduce the deposit prepaid by the merchant to compensate the
buyer.133
5.3.3.3 Escrow System
Escrow system refers that the consumer pays in advance, after certain period,
barring any complaints or conversely upon verification that the goods have been
received as expected, money is disbursed to the merchant.134 In the event there is a
complaint, the escrow agent withholds payment until the dispute is resolved via an
ODR process. The escrow agent may be a third party, or the ODR provider itself.
Alipay belongs to this system, which is similar to the Property Preservation of the
court. But property preservation would be implemented by the court after the dispute
submitted to the court. The escrow platform participate in the procedure, which is
131 Zheng Shibao (n 129) 165.
132 This deposit is different the deposit system mentioned before. The deposit in the deposit system is
particularly for the agreement to submit the dispute to some specific ODS platform; while the
prepaid deposit of the merchant here is to open a shop in Taobao. Both deposits could be used to
implementation.
133 "Consumer Protection Plan" accessed 25
November 2016.
134 Overview of Private Enforcement Mechanisms, paras 41.
222 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
established on the presumption of the great possibility of a dispute taking place.135
Alipay is a branch of Alibaba, which is a payment platform. When the seller has
submitted the deposit, and the buyer has transferred the payment of the commodity
to his account in Alipay this would let Taobao control funds of both parties. Taobao
could ask Alipay to transfer funds according to the settlement result of Taobao itself
and Alipay could assist to enforce the fund transfer according to the negotiation
between the parties, or the decision of a third party, or the judicial judgment.136
5.3.3.4 Subrogated Performance
If ODR decision supports the consumer, the platform directly compensates the
buyer. Later, the platform recourse to the merchant according to their agreement.137
Taobao has launched the system of "pay in advance", which is the expression of
subrogated performance. On this point, Taobao has considered more for the
consumer. If the parties can't reach the agreement, Taobao will make a preliminary
judgment. If Taobao thinks the buyer has no responsibility, before the final decision
(Taobao consumer service or public review), Taobao will first compensate the buyer
with its own funds.138 When the final decision comes out, Taobao will recover the
money from the merchant.
5.3.3.5 Insurance System
With the notification and agreement to the merchant, the e-commerce platform
will draw some proportion of money from each transaction to pay for the insurance
fee. Once disputes happen, and the decision has supported the consumer, the
insurance company will compensate the consumer in advance. Taobao has also
connected the insurance system with the trustmarks. Only if the merchant has joined
the insurance plan, Taobao will grant the correspondent insurance mark. If the
merchant doesn't perform the decision, besides the deposit, Taobao can also use
insurance to pay to the consumer in advance.139
Comparing with the incentive and penalty measures, the implementation
measures of the above alternatives are more independent, which does not purely rely
135 Gao Wei (n 102) 1074.
136 Ma Yongbao, 'Dispute Settlement of Taobao from Aspect of Legal Perspective' (2013) 5 Journal
of Shanghai University of Political Science & Law 71-78, 72.
137 Zheng Shibao (n 129) 166.
138 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 111.
139 See the example: accessed 25 November 2016.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 223
on the e-commerce itself or the conscious behaviour of the merchant, but to utilize
the implementation mechanism itself to play an effective enforcement function. The
deliberations of UNCITRAL and the experience of Alibaba provide valuable
insights and suggestions for ODR mechanism reform. Of course, any single
implementation measure may have its own limitations. Therefore, only with a
comprehensive application of various implementation mechanisms that complement
each other, can cross-border e-commerce disputes be efficiently solved and the
relevant outcome be enforced more effectively.
5.4 Innovate a "Sector-Oriented, Government Regulatory and Public
Participation" ODR Mechanism
The lukewarm growth of China ODR has proved that government-oriented
model is not very effective. At the beginning of system establishment, the
government is the most important advocate power. Like USA and EU,140 the initial
stage of ODR is promoted by the government, reflected in the promotion and
making regulations, to let the public know ODR and understand ODR. But later, at
the development stage, market is the decisive aspect for ODR because e-commerce
is sector-oriented. Government should play its regulatory role well. Unfortunately,
in China, at the first establishment stage, the ODR has failed to take-off due to
limited promotion, insufficient regulation and few funds to support. It is imperative
that the government pays more attention on ODR establishment.
After the ODR developed along the right line, it should strengthen the
self-discipline of e-commerce sector, also the autonomy of ODR platform.
Additionally, from the experiences of the developed ODR platforms in other
countries, such as Web Seals, Trust Mark and Code of Online Business Practices, it
is clear that most of them have through sector autonomy voluntarily submission of
the disputes to ODR provider and promised the implementation of the decision and
created a trust relationship among the e-commerce merchant, the e-commerce
platform and the consumer. Just by means of sector-oriented and private
implementation mechanism, ODR could pass through the barriers of the national
jurisdiction to create a new rapid, cheap and fair method, which is suitable to the
online economy under the circumstances of the global e-commerce environment.141
140 Paul Stylianou "Online Dispute Resolution: The Case For A Treaty Between The United States
And The European Union In Resolving Cross-Border E-Commerce Disputes" (2008) 1 Syracuse
Journal of International Law and Commerce 117-143.
141 Xu Jiqiang "Rise of ODR and the Replying of Our Country" (2001) 59 Journal of Gansu Institute
of Political Science and Law 34-38, 36.
224 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Another important force to promote the development of ODR is from the
society. In essence, the social power could participate in ODR, which is a way to
propagate ODR. In the context of social participation, it is important to make sure
the result is fair and just, the procedure should be reasonable, the qualification of
the participant clear and the dispute within the knowledge of the social power. On
this point, Taobao public review system has been a model. Furthermore, there is an
encouragement system to the reviewer. For each time the reviewer participated a
review, he can earn the corresponding credits, which could be used to public
welfare undertaking or change to the peripheral products of Taobao. Until March
2016, the public welfare funds contributed by public reviewer have accumulated to
RMB 800,000. To utilize these funds, Taobao has purchased critical illness
insurance for nearly 5,000 orphans; supplied free warm lunch for 120,000 pupils in
poverty areas; extended the pneumoconiosis patients 1,250,000 hours' life. 142
Getting from the society and repaying to the society, with which, Taobao has got a
very high social status in China.
VI CONCLUSION
One couldn't leave the society and culture of a country when understanding the
ODS mechanism. In China, presently, almost every e-commerce platform has its
own internal ODS mechanism and the operation condition is comparatively good.
The number of utilizing E-commerce internal platform is the biggest and the rules of
disputes settlement are rich, but the defect is that the result has no legal effect. While
online court is the latest channel and the forcibility is the strongest, but because of
high cost and complex procedure, it is not the main stream to solve large- volume
and low-value commercial disputes. China has created the pilot and enhanced the
technology support concerning online court with the reform of judicial system. But it
could not be perfected in a short span. ODR is the most important way as it invites
the third party to neutrally judge, and in comparison with the E-commerce internal
platform ODR would be more just and fairer. On the other side, comparing with
online court, ODR costs less and the procedure is simpler. In China, although the
ODS mechanism has been generally established, the ODR system has developed
very slowly.
The main challenges of China ODS mechanism establishment include limited
legislation, developing technology, government ignorance, and unreasonable fees,
etc. To analyse the international practice of UNCITRAL and domestic experience of
e-commerce platform in China, the future directions of ODR should focus on the
142 Alibaba Group (n 24) 6.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 225
scientific procedure design, the important function of the third party, the diversity of
the decision implementation methods, and the new operation way of ODR, that is,
"Sector-oriented, Government regulatory and Pubic participation".
eWTP ODS
Target 1 Through the dialogue between the
public and the private to improve the
trade environment and cultivate the
cross-border e-commerce trade rules
Through the dialogue between the
public and the private to improve
the ODS environment and cultivate
the cross-border e-commerce ODS
rules
Target 2 Cooperate with WTO to enhance the
requirements of developing
e-commerce and perfect WTO
Agreement on Trade Facilitation
Follow UNCITRAL to enhance the
requirements of developing
e-commerce and perfect TNODR
Target 3 Assist the development of
cross-border e-commerce
Assist the development of
cross-border e-commerce
Table 2 Target Comparison between eWTP and ODS
Since 2015, the State Council of China has advocated "Internet +" strategy, which
is to combine internet with different industries, among which, "internet +
e-commerce" is one of the important content. 143 Additionally, to safeguard the
success of "internet +" strategy, the State Council also requires the legislation of
"internet +".
144 Under the circumstances, eWTP has been recently prompted by Jack
Ma, who is the director of Alibaba. Being an important sector, the complete of eWTP
could not ignore the ODS mechanism. Comparing the eWTP and ODS, (Table 2)
their targets and realized methods are greatly similar. The final dream of eWTP is to
create a global e-commerce platform, with the characteristics of global buy, global
sale, high efficiency, complete transparency without obstacles. Consumers and
merchants from every country could cross the national boundary and physical
barriers, and arrive at any corner of the world.145 This is totally coincided with that
of ODS system. Thus, what can be predicted is that with the complete development
of eWTP, the auxiliary ODS mechanism should be further developed. For China, it
143 State Council Guiding Opinion on Actively Promoting "Internet +" Activity, State Council, (1 July
2015), Section II (8).
144 Ibid Section III (3) 4.
145 11.11 of this Year is the First Step toward EWTP accessed 25 November 2016.
226 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
is urgent to grasp the opportunity to develop the e-commerce sector under the
circumstances of "internet +", at the same time, to utilize eWTP, to improve its ODS
mechanism, especially ODR, and try to become the legislator of new rules on
e-commerce.
REFERENCES
Alibaba Group "Alibaba Ecosystem Internet Volunteers Research Report 2016"
accessed 15
November 2016.
Lodder, Arno R and John Zeleznikow "Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute
Resolution" in Mohamed S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh and Daniel Rainey (eds)
Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice, A Treatise On Technology And
Dispute Resolution (The Netherlands, Eleven International Publishing, 2012).
CECRC "2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints
Monitoring of China E-commerce, 10 March 2016": accessed 15 November 2016.
Ding, Ying "Online Settlement of Online Consumer Dispute – Taking Taobao
Platform as the Example" (2014) 2 Wuhan University International Law Review
208-236.
Walton, Douglas and David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute
resolution" (2005) 13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273–295.
Heuvel, Esther van den "Online Dispute Resolution as A Solution to
Cross-Border E-Disputes - An Introduction to ODR" p 16 accessed 19 November 2016.
Katsh, Ethan and Leah Wing "Ten Years of Online Dispute Resolution: Looking
at the Past and Constructing the Future" (2006) 38 University Of Toledo Law
Review 101-126.
Katsh, Ethan "Online Dispute Resolution: Some Implications for the Emergence
of Law in Cyberspace" (2006) 10(3) Lex Electronica 6 accessed 15 January 2017.
Fang, Xuhui and Wen Yunzhi "Internet + Times: Opportunity to Introduce the
'Fourth Party' of ODR – Taking Smartsettle as the Example" (2015) 8 Enterprise
Economy 101-104.
Gao, Wei "Legal Analysis on Non-Binding Online Arbitration to Solve
E-commerce Dispute" (2012) 2 Academic Journal of Zhongzhou 76-80.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 227
Gao, Wei "System Analysis of Internet Dispute Settlement – Two Paths and
Society Adoption Problem" (2014) 4 Peking University Law Journal 1059-1079.
Reidenberg, Joel "Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules
Through Technology" (1998) 76 Texas Law Review 553-593.
Lessig, Lawrence Code: Version 2.0 (Cambridge, Basic Books, 2006).
Li, Hu Research on Online Arbitration (Beijing, China Democracy and Law
Press, 2005).
Long, Fei "Development Condition and Future Prospect of China ODR" (2016)
10 Journal of Law Application 2-7.
Luo, Xiulan "A Study on the Disputes Settlement Mechanism in Online
Transactions – Based on the Visual Angle of Complementation between Folk Law
and State Law" (2010) 8 Hebei Law Science 57-65.
Ma, Yongbao "Dispute Settlement of Taobao from Aspect of Legal Perspective"
(2013) 5 Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science & Law 71-78.
Poblet, Marta "Introduction to Mobile Technologies, Conflict Management, and
ODR: Exploring Common Grounds" in Marta Poblet Mobile Technologies for
Conflict Management (Netherlands, Springer, 2011) 6.
Turel, Ofir and Yufei Yuan "Online dispute resolution services for electronic
markets: a user centric research agenda" (2007) 5(6) International Journal of
Electronic Business 590-603.
Cortes, Pablo "Accredited Online Dispute Resolution Services: Creating
European Legal Standards for Ensuring Fair and Effective Processes" (2008) 17(3)
Information & Communications Technology Law 221-237.
Stylianou, Paul "Online Dispute Resolution: The Case for a Treaty Between the
United States and the European Union In Resolving Cross-Border E-Commerce
Disputes" (2008) 1 Syracuse Journal of International Law & Commerce 117-143.
Cooter, R, S Marks and R Mnookin "Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: A
Testable Model of Strategic Behavior" (1982) 11 The Journal of Legal Studies
225-251.
Shen, Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Structuring
Right Protection and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Inside & Outside of Court 7-11.
Leeson, Susan M and Bryan M Johnston Ending it: Dispute Resolution in
America (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing, 1988).
228 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Patterson, Susan R and D Grant Seabolt Essentials of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (2nd ed, Dallas, Pearson Publications, 2001).
UNCITRAL, Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) on the
work of its twenty-second session.
Mitchell, William J City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge,
Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1995).
Xiao, Yongping and Xie Xinsheng "ODR: New Model to Solve E-commerce
Dispute" (2003) 6 China Legal Science 146-157.
Xu, Jiqiang "Rise of ODR and the Replying of Our Country" (2001) 59 Journal
of Gansu Institute of Political Science and Law 34-38.
Xue, Yuan "Establishment of On-line Global Dispute Resolution System for
Cross-border E-commerce Transactions" (2014) 4 International Business 95-103.
Zheng, Jun "On Development of ODR in China – Taking Taobao Dispute
Settlement Model as the Example" (2014) 20 Legal System and Society 44-45.
Zheng, Shibao "On Compulsory Enforcement Mechanism of ODR Decision"
(2014) 185(3) Law Review 161-169.
Zhou, Ziyu, Quan and Chang Bai "Online Court: Trial Model in Internet Times"
(2014) 6 Journal of Law Application 103-107.
...ce market transaction amount totally amounted to RMB12.3
trillion, which has surpassed USA to be the biggest global internet retailing market.
In 2015, the amount has been up to RMB16.4 trillion.2
The increasing of the transaction amount will inevitably lead to the increase of
disputes. From 10 days after 11.11 of 2016, government department of Hangzhou,
* PhD. Researcher, Faculty of Law, University of Macau, China.
1 "11.11 Mega-Sale Breaks Rmb 120 Billion Gmv"
accessed 15 November 2016.
2 "2015 Development Condition of Different Sub-sector of E-commerce in China"
accessed 15 November 2016.
192 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Shenzhen and Shanghai has respectively received the 1561,
3
5684 and 2215 claims
concerning 11.11 activity, which are only about complains in 11.11 and in several
cities. Statistics of China E-Commerce Research Centre (CECRC) showed, in 2015,
totally, China e-commerce complaint and right protection public service platform6
has received more than 100,000 complains, among which online purchase accounted
for 43.74%, cross-border online purchase accounted for 7.53%.7
(Figure 1).
Figure 1 Distribution Condition of Complaints from Different Platform in 2015
Sources from: CECRC, 2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints
Monitoring of China E-commerce, 10 March 2016; available at:
.
In this e-commerce booming times, the traditional disputes settlement
mechanism is not suitable because of the far distance and great amounts of internet
disputes, aspects of manpower, material resources and financial capacity.
Accordingly, in the field of international law, online dispute settlement (ODS)
mechanism emerged, combining with the information technology and traditional
3 "Complaints Statistics Concerning 11.11"
accessed 15 November 2016.
4 "Complaints Concerning 11.11 in Shenzhen is 48% Plus than the Last Year"
accessed 15 November
2016.
5 "The False Advertisement of 11.11 is Concentrated in Shanghai"
accessed 15 November
2016.
6 accessed 15 November 2016.
7 CECRC "2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints Monitoring of China
E-commerce" (10 March 2016)
accessed 15 November 2016.
Online
purchase,
43.74%
Life service,
24.05%
Cross-border
purchase
online, 7.53%
Internet …
B2B, 2.63%
Wechat
Business,
2.51%
Business by
Mobile
Phone, 1.85%
Logistics
Expreses,
1.09%
Others,
10.84%
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 193
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR),
8
to adapt to the development of the
big-amount and low-value cross-border e-commerce. Under this circumstance, how
to establish a reasonable, convenient and efficient ODS mechanism is significant.
Currently, there are three channels in China: e-commerce internal platform, online
court and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), among which, e-commerce internal
platform operates well, while ODR has met many challenges. Some experiences
from e-commerce internal platform could be a reference when developing ODR in
China.
In response to the sharp increase of online cross-border transactions worldwide,
UNCITRAL has also made some contributions for resolving disputes arising from
cross-border low-value sales or service contracts concluded using electronic
communications. On Forty-ninth session (27 June-15 July 2016) of UNCITRAL,
Online dispute resolution for cross-border electronic commerce transactions:
Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution (TNODR) published, which also has
been adopted by the General Assembly of UN on 13 December 2016.
9
It
concentrates on ODR and could also supply a reference to China to create ODR
mechanism.
The paper will briefly examine the 3 channels of China on ODS system. Through
some quantitative and qualitative analysis, as well as the cases study, to evaluate the
current situation of cross-border ODS mechanism in China. The paper intends to
make the reader better understand the Chinese style online dispute settlement
modes, evaluate the performance of different ODS methods in China, point out the
obstacles and challenges of ODR in China, and to find some directions with the
reference of UNCITRAL TNODR and Alibaba experience in context of Electronic
World Trade Platform (eWTP).
8 ADR supplies the theoretical bases of ODR, computer technology provides an online environment
affecting. See Douglas Walton and David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute
resolution" (2005) 13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273-295, 274.
9 General Assembly of UN, 'Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 13 December 2016'
UN Doc A/RES/71/138 (19 December 2016) assessed 15 January 2017.
Het transactiebedrag op de markt bedroeg in totaal 12,3 biljoen RMB, wat de VS heeft overtroffen als de grootste wereldwijde internetverkoopmarkt. In 2015 liep het bedrag op tot 16,4 biljoen RMB.2 De verhoging van het transactiebedrag zal onvermijdelijk leiden tot een toename van geschillen. Vanaf 10 dagen na 11.11 van 2016, overheidsafdeling van Hangzhou, * PhD. Onderzoeker, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit van Macau, China. 1 "11.11 Mega-Sale Breaks Rmb 120 Billion Gmv" <www.alizila.com/2016-11-11-global-shopping-festival-wrap-up/> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 2 "2015 Ontwikkelingstoestand van verschillende sub- sector van e-commerce in China" <http://news.iresearch.cn/zt/260791.shtml> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 192 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE Shenzhen en Shanghai hebben respectievelijk de 1561, 3 5684 en 2215 claims ontvangen betreffende 11.11. activiteit, die alleen over klachten gaat in 11.11 en in verschillende steden. Statistieken van het China E-Commerce Research Center (CECRC) toonden aan dat het Chinese e-commerce-klacht- en rechtsbeschermingsplatform voor openbare diensten6 in 2015 in totaal meer dan 100.000 klachten heeft ontvangen, waaronder online aankopen goed voor 43,74%, grensoverschrijdende online-aankopen goed voor 7,53%,7 (Figuur 1). Figuur 1 Distributietoestand van klachten van verschillende platforms in 2015 Bronnen uit: CECRC, jaarverslag 2015 over consumentenervaring en klachtenmonitoring van e-commerce in China, 10 maart 2016; beschikbaar op: <www.100ec.cn/zt/upload_data/2016315/images/2015bg.pdf>. In deze e-commerce booming tijden is het traditionele geschillenbeslechtingsmechanisme niet geschikt vanwege de grote afstand en de grote hoeveelheid internetgeschillen, aspecten van mankracht, materiĂ«le middelen en financiĂ«le draagkracht. Dienovereenkomstig ontstond op het gebied van internationaal recht een mechanisme voor onlinegeschillenbeslechting (ODS), gecombineerd met de informatietechnologie en traditionele 3 "Complaints Statistics Concerning 11.11" <www.hangzhou.gov.cn/art/2016/11/23/art_812268_34 67419.html> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 4 "Klachten over 11.11 in Shenzhen is 48% meer dan vorig jaar" <http://news.takungpao.com/society/topnews/2016-11/3397313.html> geraadpleegd op 15 November 2016. 5 "The False Advertisement of 11.11 is Concentrated in Shanghai" <http://finance.people.com.cn/n1/2016/1123/c1004-28891360.html> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 6 <www.100ec .cn/zt/315/> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 7 CECRC "2015 Annual Report on Consumer's Experience and Complaints Monitoring of China E-commerce" (10 maart 2016) <www.100ec.cn/zt/upload_data/2016315/images /2015bg.pdf> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. Online aankoop, 43,74% Life service, 24,05% Grensoverschrijdende online aankoop, 7,53% internet … B2B, 2,63% Wechat Business, 2,51 % Zakelijk per mobiele telefoon, 1,85% logistieke expres, 1,09% andere, 10,84% OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 193 Alternatieve geschillenbeslechting (ADR), 8 om zich aan te passen aan de ontwikkeling van grote hoeveelheden en lage waarde grens e-commerce. Onder deze omstandigheden is het belangrijk hoe een redelijk, handig en efficiĂ«nt ODS-mechanisme kan worden opgezet. Momenteel zijn er drie kanalen in China: intern platform voor e-commerce, online rechtbank en online geschillenbeslechting (ODR), waaronder het interne platform voor e-commerce goed werkt, terwijl ODR veel uitdagingen heeft aangegaan. Sommige ervaringen van het interne e-commerceplatform kunnen een referentie zijn bij het ontwikkelen van ODR in China. Als reactie op de sterke toename van online grensoverschrijdende transacties wereldwijd, heeft UNCITRAL ook enkele bijdragen geleverd voor het oplossen van geschillen die voortvloeien uit grensoverschrijdende verkoop- of servicecontracten met een lage waarde die zijn gesloten met behulp van elektronische communicatie. Op de negenenveertigste zitting (27 juni-15 juli 2016) van UNCITRAL, Online geschillenbeslechting voor grensoverschrijdende elektronische handelstransacties: Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution (TNODR), gepubliceerd, die ook is aangenomen door de Algemene Vergadering van de VN op 13 december 2016. 9 Het concentreert zich op ODR en zou ook een verwijzing naar China kunnen leveren om een ODR-mechanisme te creĂ«ren. Het papier zal kort de 3 kanalen van China op het ODS-systeem onderzoeken. Door middel van een kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve analyse, evenals de casestudy, om de huidige situatie van het grensoverschrijdende ODS-mechanisme in China te evalueren. Het artikel is bedoeld om de lezer een beter begrip te geven van de online geschillenbeslechtingsmethoden in Chinese stijl, de prestaties van verschillende ODS-methoden in China te evalueren, de obstakels en uitdagingen van ODR in China aan te wijzen en enkele richtingen te vinden met de referentie van UNCITRAL TNODR en Alibaba-ervaring in de context van Electronic World Trade Platform (eWTP). 8 ADR levert de theoretische basis van ODR, computertechnologie zorgt voor een online omgeving die van invloed is. Zie Douglas Walton en David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute resolution" (2005) 13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273-295, 274. 9 General Assembly of UN, 'Resolution aangenomen door de General Assembly on 13 december 2016' UN Doc A /RES/71/138 (19 december 2016) <http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/71/138> beoordeeld op 15 januari 2017.
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
II EXISTING CHANNELS AND STANDARD RULES OF ODS
MECHANISM OF CHINA
Figure 2 Existing channels and standard rules of online dispute settlement mechanism of China
The three channels of ODS in China respectively are: e-commerce internal
platform, online court and ODR with the interference of the third party. (Figure 2).
2.1 E-Commerce Internal ODS Platform: Taking Alibaba as the Example
E-commerce internal ODS mechanism is called "dispute settlement system with
the intervening of the civil third party in connection with the parties".
10 Some
e-commerce platform itself supplied the civil settlement system when the transaction
dispute happened internal of the platform. It conforms to the characteristics and
needs of the transaction online, digests many online transaction dispute of
low-value, which not only maintain the stability and credibility of their own
platform, but also are helpful to protect the legitimate interests of the parties.
Alibaba,
11 being the most excellent and biggest e-commerce platform, has
established a well operated ODS mechanism. Among Alibaba Group, Taobao and
Tmall respectively concentrate on C2C and B2C market. The following will take
them as the example to analyse the category of the concrete dispute settlement
methods and its characteristics.
10 Luo Xiulan "A Study on the Disputes Settlement Mechanism in Online Transactions – Based on
the Visual Angle of Complementation between Folk Law and State Law" (2010) 8 Hebei Law
Science 57-64, 60.
11 Alibaba is the well-known pioneer of e-commerce, which has the world biggest B2B market –
Alibaba, world biggest C2C market – Taobao, biggest domestic B2C market – Tmall, and the most
excellent pay instrument – Alipay. It is the most advanced internet comprehensive market in the
world. Through the development of many years, it has established its comparatively perfect legal
system.
China ODS
Mechanism
Internal Disput
Settlement Platform of
E-commerce
Negotiation
Intervened by
the staff of
the Ecommerce
Public
Review
Report
online
Online Litigation
ODR
Negotiation Mediation Arbitration
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 195
In order to solve online disputes, Alibaba has published a series of regulations,
including: Taobao Rules, 12 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, 13 Tmall
International Dispute Resolution Rules,
14 Trade Dispute Rules,15 and Convention
on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation),
16 etc. Besides, Alibaba has set up
various online platforms
17 to solve disputes. All those rules have no application
restriction on where the parties are located. In fact, in the Big Data times, sometimes,
it's difficult to tell the pure domestic transaction or cross-border one, and most of the
rules could be applicable to all transactions.
Basically, there are 4 ways to solve the online dispute according to Taobao rules.
Tmall has the same procedure: negotiation between the parties; Custom service
intervention; Public Review system; and Report online.
Figure 3 The procedure of Taobao dispute settlement mechanism
12 "Taobao Rules" accessed15 November 2016.
13 "Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement" accessed 15 November 2016.
14 "Tmall International Dispute Resolution Rules accessed 15 November 2016.
15 "Trade Dispute Rules" accessed 15 November 2016.
16 "Convention on Taobao Public Review" (Trial Implementation) accessed 15 November 2016.
17 Including "Taobao Rules"' accessed 15 November 2016; 'TMALL
Rules'
accessed 15 November 2016; "Alibaba Rule Centre"
accessed 15 November 2016; "Taobao
Judgment Centre" accessed 15 November 2016.
196 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
Sources from: .
2.1.1 Negotiation between the parties
If a transaction disputes happened, according to "autonomy" principle, it is
possible to choose negotiation to resolve the disputes. Other than negotiation it is
possible to seek Taobao consumer service intervening, public review system or
choose other alternative method.18 The choice should be made after the application
of refund, (Figure 3) ie the starting point of the application of Taobao Rules of
Dispute Settlement is the buyer's application to refund through Taobao platform.
2.1.2 Taobao Consumer Service Intervening
The status of Taobao consumer service is equal to the neutral third party in
mediation and its decision is non-binding. There are 3 ways to initiate the
intervening of Taobao consumer service: 1) 3 days after the submission of refund
request, and the seller did not negotiate with the buyer; 2) the parties failed to meet
the agreement, the buyer could enter the right protection channel after 3 days of the
refund request; or 3) If the transaction has been finished, the consumer found
aftersales serviced is needed, he can submit the appropriate complaints in 15 days
after the end of the transaction for the reasons such as delay to delivery, violation a
promise, etc (Figure 3). The parties should submit the evidences, which include:
photos of the goods, chat records of Aliwangwang, record on Taobao concerning the
transaction procedure, etc. Although the decision made by the consumer service is
non-binding, Taobao could directly take action against the seller and force the seller
enforce the decision by the private implementation measures. If the consumer is not
satisfied with the decision, he could find other relief method such as litigation or
arbitration. At the same time, if the seller is not satisfied, he could appeal to Taobao
in 15 days since the decision is made by the consumer service.
2.1.3 Public Review System
Being the biggest e-commerce platform, Tabao not only faced the problem of
great disputes, but the difficulty of fairness. Taobao has found that majority of the
disputes are not complex, so that sometimes a common person could make the
decision to support a party according to his own experience. Furthermore, the
knowledge, time and method of the Taobao consumer service are limited. Therefore,
Taobao created the public review system and Taobao Judgment Centre,
19 which can
18 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 3 and art 100.
19 accessed 16 November 2016
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE II BESTAANDE KANALEN EN STANDAARD REGELS VAN ODS-MECHANISME VAN CHINA Figuur 2 Bestaande kanalen en standaardregels van online geschillenbeslechtingsmechanisme van China De drie kanalen van ODS in China zijn respectievelijk: e-commerce intern platform, online rechtbank en ODR met de tussenkomst van de derde partij. (Figuur 2). 2.1 Intern ODS-platform voor e-commerce: Alibaba als voorbeeld nemen Het interne ODS-mechanisme van e-commerce wordt "systeem voor geschillenbeslechting met tussenkomst van de civiele derde partij in verband met de partijen" genoemd. 10 Sommige e-commerceplatforms leverden zelf het civiele beslechtingssysteem toen het transactiegeschil zich binnen het platform voordeed. Het voldoet aan de kenmerken en behoeften van de transactie online, verteert veel online transactiegeschillen van lage waarde, die niet alleen de stabiliteit en geloofwaardigheid van hun eigen platform behouden, maar ook nuttig zijn om de legitieme belangen van de partijen te beschermen. Alibaba, 11 als het meest uitstekende en grootste e-commerceplatform, heeft een goed werkend ODS-mechanisme opgezet. Van de Alibaba Group concentreren Taobao en Tmall zich respectievelijk op de C2C- en B2C-markt. Het volgende zal ze als voorbeeld nemen om de categorie van de concrete methoden voor geschillenbeslechting en de kenmerken ervan te analyseren. 10 Luo Xiulan "A Study on the Disputes Settlement Mechanism in Online Transactions - Based on the Visual Angle of Complementation between Folk Law and State Law" (2010) 8 Hebei Law Science 57-64, 60. 11 Alibaba is de bekende pionier van e-commerce, met de grootste B2B-markt ter wereld – Alibaba, de grootste C2C-markt ter wereld – Taobao, de grootste binnenlandse B2C-markt – Tmall, en het meest uitstekende betaalinstrument – Alipay. Het is de meest geavanceerde internetmarkt ter wereld. Door de ontwikkeling van vele jaren heeft het zijn relatief perfecte rechtssysteem gevestigd. China ODS-mechanisme Interne geschillenbeslechting Platform voor e-commerce-onderhandeling Bemiddeld door het personeel van de E-commerce Public Review Report online Online rechtszaak ODR-onderhandeling Bemiddeling Arbitrage OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 195 Om online geschillen op te lossen, heeft Alibaba gepubliceerd een reeks voorschriften, waaronder: Taobao-regels, 12 Taobao-regels voor geschillenbeslechting, 13 Tmall International Dispute Resolution Rules, 14 Trade Dispute Rules,15 en Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), 16 enz. Bovendien heeft Alibaba opgericht verschillende online platforms 17 om geschillen op te lossen. Al die regels hebben geen toepassingsbeperking voor waar de partijen zich bevinden. In de Big Data-tijden is het soms moeilijk om de pure binnenlandse transactie of grensoverschrijdende transactie te onderscheiden, en de meeste regels kunnen van toepassing zijn op alle transacties. In principe zijn er 4 manieren om het online geschil op te lossen volgens de Taobao-regels. Tmall hanteert dezelfde procedure: onderhandelen tussen partijen; Service-interventie op maat; Openbare beoordelingssysteem; en online melden. Figuur 3 De procedure van het Taobao-mechanisme voor geschillenbeslechting 12 "Taobao-regels" <https://rule.taobao.com/detail-14.htm?spm=a2177.7231193.0.0.8qLTRA&tag=self&cId=114> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 13 " Taobao-regels voor geschillenbeslechting" <https://rule.taobao.com/detail-99.htm?spm=a2177.72311 93.0.0.MaUIEz&tag=self> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 14 "Tmall International Dispute Resolution Rules <http ://help.world.taobao.com/rule/rule_detail.htm ?spm=0.0.0.0.pSMnHg&id=1519&tag=self> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 15 "Regels voor handelsgeschillen" <http://rule.alibaba.com /rule/detail/2055.htm?spm= a271m.8038972.19992 88231.3.wp1WDA> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 16 "Convention on Taobao Public Review" (Proefimplementatie) <http://pan.taobao.com/jury/ help. htm?spm=a310u.3036333.0.0.1rsikh&type=standard> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 17 Inclusief "Taobao Rules"' <https://rule.taobao.com> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016; 'TMALL Rules' <http:// help.world.taobao.com/rule/rule_detail.htm?spm=0.0.0.0.pSMnHg&id=1519&tag=sel f> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016; "Alibaba Rule Center" <http://rule.alibaba.com/rule/detail/2060.htm ?spm=a271m.8038972.1999288231.10.ccNTkU> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016; "Taobao Judgment Centre" <http://pan.taobao.com> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 196 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE Bronnen van: <https://rule.taobao.com/index.htm?spm=a2177.7231193.1998145763.1 .HKwXzk>. 2.1.1 Onderhandeling tussen de partijen Als er een transactiegeschil heeft plaatsgevonden, is het volgens het "autonomie"-principe mogelijk om te kiezen voor onderhandeling om de geschillen op te lossen. Behalve onderhandelen is het mogelijk om tussenkomst van de Taobao-consumentendienst, een openbaar beoordelingssysteem of een andere alternatieve methode te kiezen.18 De keuze moet worden gemaakt na de aanvraag van restitutie (Figuur 3), dat wil zeggen het startpunt van de toepassing van de Taobao Rules of Dispute Afrekening is de aanvraag van de koper om terug te betalen via het Taobao-platform. 2.1.2 Taobao Consumentenservice Bemiddelen De status van Taobao Consumentenservice is gelijk aan de neutrale derde partij in bemiddeling en haar beslissing is niet bindend. Er zijn 3 manieren om de tussenkomst van de Taobao-klantenservice te starten: 1) 3 dagen na het indienen van het restitutieverzoek en de verkoper heeft niet met de koper onderhandeld; 2) de partijen zijn de overeenkomst niet nagekomen, de koper kan na 3 dagen na het terugbetalingsverzoek het juiste beschermingskanaal betreden; of 3) Als de transactie is voltooid en de consument vindt dat aftersalesservice nodig is, kan hij de juiste klachten indienen binnen 15 dagen na het einde van de transactie om redenen zoals vertraging bij de levering, schending van een belofte, enz. (Figuur 3 ). De partijen moeten de bewijsstukken overleggen, waaronder: foto's van de goederen, chatgegevens van Aliwangwang, gegevens op Taobao over de transactieprocedure, enz. Hoewel de beslissing van de consumentendienst niet bindend is, kan Taobao rechtstreeks actie ondernemen tegen de verkoper en dwingen de verkoper de beslissing af te dwingen door de particuliere uitvoeringsmaatregelen. Als de consument niet tevreden is met de beslissing, kan hij een andere oplossing zoeken, zoals een rechtszaak of arbitrage. Tegelijkertijd, als de verkoper niet tevreden is, kan hij binnen 15 dagen een beroep doen op Taobao, aangezien de beslissing is genomen door de consumentendienst. 2.1.3 Openbaar beoordelingssysteem Als het grootste e-commerceplatform had Tabao niet alleen te maken met het probleem van grote geschillen, maar ook met de moeilijkheid van eerlijkheid. Taobao heeft geconstateerd dat de meeste geschillen niet complex zijn, zodat een gewone persoon soms de beslissing kan nemen om een partij te steunen op basis van zijn eigen ervaring. Verder is de kennis, tijd en werkwijze van de Taobao consumentenservice beperkt. Daarom creĂ«erde Taobao het openbare beoordelingssysteem en Taobao Judgment Centre, 19 dat 18 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 3 en art 100. 19 <https://pan.taobao.com> geraadpleegd op 16 november 2016
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 197
let the members participate in review of the dispute, save the waiting time for both
parties, make the decision comparatively fairer.
In 3 contexts, a public review could be launched. After the failure of negotiation,
the buyer could choose Taobao consumer service intervening or public interview
system, and the latter also could be initiated by Taobao if necessary, or launched by
the seller under circumstances that the seller is dissatisfied with the decision that was
decided by Taobao according to the report of the consumer. The whole public review
team is constituted of 31 reviewers, selected by the platform at random.
20 In 168
hours,21 any party gets at least 16 support votes will win, and an effective final
decision has been constituted; however, if no party gets 16 votes, Taobao consumer
service will intervene.
22
2.1.4 Report to Taobao
With the rapid development of Taobao, the diversified commodity composition
and pluralistic business model has made Taobao platform close to a social
ecosystem. When contributed to transactions among consumers and merchants, the
ecosystem also bred many irregularities. Although Taobao has devoted great efforts
to refine the market environment, it can't fundamentally solve the violation
phenomenon. To more rapidly and effectively prevent unfair competition, Taobao
established the Report platform23 to delegate netizens to report the irregularities to
Taobao and let the social power to participate the platform governance, in order to
construct a fairer and more just e-commerce platform order. Taobao will investigate
the report in 7 days and make a decision. If the seller is dissatisfied with the result, he
can apply for the public review. The creation of Report to Taobao could not only
effectively prevent unfair competition, but also protect the members from being
damaged in advance. Moreover, through active regulatory and socialized
governance, it could make up for the deficiency of the platform on the time limit to
find the irregularities, and help the platform continuously perfect and renovate the
rules.24
20 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 9.
21 Ibid art 10.
22 Ibid art 11.
23 accessed 16 November 2016.
24 Alibaba Group "Alibaba Ecosystem Internet Volunteers Research Report 2016" p 6
accessed 15 November 2016.
198 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
2.2 Online Court: Taking Zhejiang Online Court as the Example
Litigation is the ultimate authority in dispute settlement, which has been expected
as the "fairest" method. The good utilizing of litigation system is inevitable to curb
the dispute production and promote the success of the dispute settlement. Electronic
court or online court is not just to apply some internet technology in judicial
activities,
25 but the model that all trials and relevant litigation activities are
conducted through electronic communication method, which is a new court form in
e-times with the overall merging of the trial and information technology.26 Online
court could not only facilitate the consumers and other e-commerce participant to
protect their rights rapidly, but also take advantage of Big Data to promote the
transparency of the judiciary. China has also made an attempted in some pilot courts.
China Civil Procedural Law and its judicial interpretation, Contract law and
Electronic Signature Law have confirmed the legality of the legal instruments in
electronic form and the evidence transferred in electronic form, as well, the trial with
the internet video technology is also permitted. The province or city with a
developed internet transaction could be the pilot, with the independent online trial
team and the specific technology persons.27 Therefore, being the province where the
leader of Chinese e-commerce platform, Alibaba is located, Zhejiang province has
become the first pilot to fully utilize the modern information technology to promote
judicial efficiency. In 2015, Zhejiang Supreme People's Court has focused on the
establishment of e-commerce online court.
28 Until now, there are totally 14 basic
level people's courts29 have involved in online trial and 13 types of cause of action.30
25 Long Fei "Development Condition and Future Prospect of China ODR" (2016) 10 Journal of Law
Application 2-7.
26 Zhou Ziyu, Quan Quan and Chang Bai, 'Online Court: Trial Model in Internet Times' (2014) 06
Journal of Law Application 103-107.
27 Luo Xiulan (n 10) 57-64.
28
accessed 15 November 2016.
29 14 Online courts in Zhejiang province includes Binjiang People's Court, West Lake People's
Court, yuhang People's Court, Yiwu People's Court, Taizhou Luqiao District People's Court,
Lishui Suichang People's Court, Lishui Liandu District People's Court, Taizhou Huangyan District
People's Court, Wenzhou Lucheng District People's Court, Quzhou Qujiang District People's
Court, Maanshan Yushan District People's Court, Hangzhou Xiacheng District People's Court,
Jinyun People's Court, Lishui Yunhe People's Court. Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court is the
appealing court.
30 13 categories of cause of action of Zhejiang online court are: e-commerce transaction, copyright,
credit card, alimony, trademark, marriage and family, financial loan contract, folk loan,
e-commerce small amount loan, traffic, contract, property insurance contract, aliment.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 199
The concrete procedure of online court is the same with the offline litigation,
restrictedly to comply with the Civil Procedural Law. It depends on the internet
service platform and moves every step, such as launching a lawsuit, accepting a case,
burden of proof, trial and judgment, to be completed online, which resulted in
promoting trial efficiency and save the judicial sources.31 Besides, other local courts
in China are also actively promoting the establishment of electronic court.
Additionally, at present, Chinese courts are actively transforming and upgrading
to set up informationization 3.0 of the People's Court, which focuses on data, to
make it a foundation of the future overall online court. Since 2014, China Supreme
People's Court (SPC) built China Judicial Process Information Online to disclose
various judicial information,
32 China Judgement Online to publish judgments,
33 the
trial broadcast live platform to broadcast live all open trial of SPC through the
Internet,
34 China Implementation Information Disclosed Online to disclose
information on the lists of dishonest persons subjected to execution, implementation
procedure, and the relevant legal instruments.35 All local courts have linked with the
above platforms. All of these activities are preparing for the future online court,
which would be intelligent, opening-up and transparent.
2.3 Online Dispute Resolution
Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is a new way developed on the basis of the
traditional ADR with the help of information technology, which would allow all of
the participants to communicate without the restriction of space and time.
UNCITRAL defines "ODR" as a solution which can assist the parties in resolving
the dispute in a simple, fast, flexible and secure manner, without the need for
physical presence at a meeting or hearing, which includes but not limited to
ombudsmen, complaints boards, negotiation, conciliation, mediation, arbitration and
others.36 Now, ODR has developed in countries where online transaction has been
prosperous, which is the important method to solve the domestic or international
online transaction disputes for its flexibility, convenience, cheapness, speciality and
justice. Chinese ODR system is at the beginning of establishment, which includes
31 accessed 17 November 2016.
32 accessed 18 November 2016.
33 accessed 18 November 2016.
34 accessed 18 November 2016.
35 "Implementation in the Sunshine is Powerful" accessed 18 November 2016.
36 Part II, Section 1, 2, TNODR
OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 197 laat de leden deelnemen aan de herziening van het geschil, bespaart de wachttijd voor beide partijen, en maakt de beslissing relatief eerlijker. In 3 contexten zou een openbare herziening kunnen worden gelanceerd. Na het mislukken van de onderhandelingen kan de koper kiezen voor een tussenkomst van de Taobao-consumentendienst of een systeem voor openbare interviews, en dit laatste kan indien nodig ook door Taobao worden geïnitieerd of door de verkoper worden gelanceerd onder omstandigheden dat de verkoper niet tevreden is met de beslissing die is genomen door Taobao volgens het rapport van de consument. Het hele openbare beoordelingsteam bestaat uit 31 recensenten, willekeurig door het platform geselecteerd. 20 In 168 uur21 zal elke partij die ten minste 16 steunstemmen krijgt, winnen en is er een effectieve definitieve beslissing genomen; als geen enkele partij echter 16 stemmen krijgt, zal de consumentendienst van Taobao ingrijpen. 22 2.1.4 Rapporteren aan Taobao Met de snelle ontwikkeling van Taobao heeft de gediversifieerde samenstelling van goederen en het pluralistische bedrijfsmodel ervoor gezorgd dat het Taobao-platform dicht bij een sociaal ecosysteem staat. Wanneer het werd bijgedragen aan transacties tussen consumenten en handelaren, bracht het ecosysteem ook veel onregelmatigheden voort. Hoewel Taobao grote inspanningen heeft geleverd om de marktomgeving te verfijnen, kan het het schendingsfenomeen niet fundamenteel oplossen. Om oneerlijke concurrentie sneller en effectiever te voorkomen, heeft Taobao het Rapportplatform23 opgericht om netizens te delegeren om de onregelmatigheden aan Taobao te melden en de sociale macht te laten deelnemen aan het platformbeheer, om een eerlijker en rechtvaardiger platformorde voor e-commerce op te bouwen. Taobao zal het rapport binnen 7 dagen onderzoeken en een beslissing nemen. Als de verkoper niet tevreden is met het resultaat, kan hij de openbare beoordeling aanvragen. De oprichting van Report to Taobao zou niet alleen oneerlijke concurrentie effectief kunnen voorkomen, maar ook de leden beschermen tegen vroegtijdige schade. Bovendien zou het, door actief regelgevend en gesocialiseerd bestuur, de tekortkoming van het platform kunnen compenseren met betrekking tot de tijdslimiet om de onregelmatigheden op te sporen, en het platform kunnen helpen de regels voortdurend te perfectioneren en te vernieuwen.24 20 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation) , art 9. 21 Ibid art 10. 22 Ibid art 11. 23 <http://jubao.taobao.com> geraadpleegd op 16 november 2016. 24 Alibaba Group "Alibaba Ecosystem Internet Volunteers Research Report 2016" p 6 <http:// i.aliresearch.com/file/20161010/20161010180743.pdf> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 198 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE 2.2 Online rechtbank: de online rechtbank van Zhejiang als voorbeeld nemen Procesvoering is de ultieme autoriteit in geschillenbeslechting, die werd verwacht als de " eerlijkste" methode. Een goed gebruik van het procesrechtsysteem is onvermijdelijk om de productie van geschillen te beteugelen en het succes van de geschillenbeslechting te bevorderen. Elektronische rechtbank of online rechtbank is niet alleen om internettechnologie toe te passen bij gerechtelijke activiteiten, 25 maar het model dat alle processen en relevante procesvoeringsactiviteiten worden uitgevoerd via elektronische communicatiemethode, wat een nieuwe rechtsvorm is in e-times met de algehele samensmelting van het proces en de informatietechnologie.26 Onlinerechtbank zou niet alleen de consumenten en andere deelnemers aan e-commerce kunnen helpen om hun rechten snel te beschermen, maar ook gebruik kunnen maken van big data om de transparantie van de rechterlijke macht te bevorderen. China heeft ook een poging gedaan in een aantal pilot-rechtbanken. Het burgerlijk procesrecht van China en de gerechtelijke interpretatie ervan, het contractenrecht en het recht op elektronische handtekeningen hebben de wettigheid van de juridische instrumenten in elektronische vorm en het in elektronische vorm overgedragen bewijsmateriaal bevestigd, en het proces met internetvideotechnologie is ook toegestaan. De provincie of stad met een ontwikkelde internettransactie zou de pilot kunnen zijn, met het onafhankelijke online proefteam en de specifieke technologiemensen.27 Als de provincie waar Alibaba is gevestigd, is de leider van het Chinese e-commerceplatform, en is de provincie Zhejiang uitgegroeid tot de eerste pilot die de moderne informatietechnologie volledig benut om de justitiële efficiëntie te bevorderen. In 2015 heeft het Hooggerechtshof van Zhejiang zich gericht op de oprichting van een online rechtbank voor e-commerce. 28 Tot nu toe zijn er in totaal 14 burgerrechtbanken29 op basisniveau betrokken geweest bij online processen en 13 soorten rechtsvorderingen.30 25 Long Fei "Development Condition and Future Prospect of China ODR" (2016) 10 Journal of Law Application 2-7 . 26 Zhou Ziyu, Quan Quan en Chang Bai, 'Online Court: Trial Model in Internet Times' (2014) 06 Journal of Law Application 103-107. 27 Luo Xiulan (n 10) 57-64. 28 <www.zjwsft.gov.cn/portal/main/domain/index.htm?spm=a1z8s.8020637.0.0.QYobBd> geraadpleegd op 15 november 2016. 29 14 Online rechtbanken in de provincie Zhejiang omvatten de Binjiang People's Court, West Lake People's Rechtbank, Volksrechtbank Yuhang, Volksrechtbank Yiwu, Volksrechtbank Taizhou Luqiao, Volksrechtbank Lishui Suichang, Volksrechtbank Lishui Liandu, Volksrechtbank Taizhou Huangyan, Volksrechtbank Wenzhou Lucheng, Volksrechtbank Quzhou Qujiang, Volksrechtbank Maanshan Yushan , Volksrechtbank Hangzhou Xiacheng District, Volksrechtbank Jinyun, Volksrechtbank Lishui Yunhe. Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court is het hof van beroep. 30 13 categorieën van rechtsvorderingen van de online rechtbank van Zhejiang zijn: e-commercetransactie, auteursrecht, creditcard, alimentatie, handelsmerk, huwelijk en gezin, financiële leningsovereenkomst, volkslening, e-commerce lening voor kleine bedragen, verkeer, contract, eigendom verzekeringscontract, voedsel. OVER CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 199 De concrete procedure van de online rechtbank is hetzelfde voor de offline procesvoering, beperkt tot naleving van het burgerlijk procesrecht. Het is afhankelijk van het internetserviceplatform en zorgt ervoor dat elke stap, zoals het starten van een rechtszaak, het accepteren van een zaak, bewijslast, proces en oordeel, online wordt afgerond, wat resulteerde in het bevorderen van de efficiëntie van het proces en het redden van gerechtelijke bronnen.31 Bovendien, andere lokale rechtbanken in China promoten ook actief de oprichting van elektronische rechtbanken. Bovendien zijn Chinese rechtbanken momenteel actief bezig met het transformeren en upgraden om informationization 3.0 van de People's Court op te zetten, die zich richt op gegevens, om het een fundament te maken van de toekomstige algemene online rechtbank. Sinds 2014 heeft het China Supreme People's Court (SPC) China Judicial Process Information Online gebouwd om verschillende gerechtelijke informatie openbaar te maken, 32 China Judgment Online om uitspraken te publiceren, 33 het live-platform voor de uitzending van het proces om alle open processen van SPC via internet live uit te zenden, 34 China Implementatie-informatie die online wordt bekendgemaakt om informatie vrij te geven over de lijsten van oneerlijke personen die zijn onderworpen aan executie, de implementatieprocedure en de relevante juridische instrumenten.35 Alle lokale rechtbanken zijn verbonden met de bovenstaande platforms. Al deze activiteiten bereiden zich voor op de toekomstige online rechtbank, die intelligent, open en transparant zou zijn. 2.3 Onlinegeschillenbeslechting Onlinegeschillenbeslechting (ODR) is een nieuwe manier die is ontwikkeld op basis van de traditionele ADR met behulp van informatietechnologie, waardoor alle deelnemers kunnen communiceren zonder beperking van ruimte en tijd. UNCITRAL definieert "ODR" als een oplossing die de partijen kan helpen bij het oplossen van het geschil op een eenvoudige, snelle, flexibele en veilige manier, zonder de noodzaak van fysieke aanwezigheid bij een vergadering of hoorzitting, inclusief maar niet beperkt tot ombudsmannen, klachtencommissies , onderhandeling, verzoening, bemiddeling, arbitrage en andere.36 Nu heeft ODR zich ontwikkeld in landen waar online transacties welvarend zijn geweest, wat de belangrijke methode is om binnenlandse of internationale online transactiegeschillen op te lossen vanwege de flexibiliteit, het gemak, de lage prijs, de specialiteit en gerechtigheid. Het Chinese ODR-systeem staat aan het begin van de oprichting, waaronder 31 <http://zjnews.zjol.com.cn/system/2015/08/17/020791159.shtml> op 17 november 2016. 32 <http://splcgk .court.gov.cn/zgsplcxxgkw/> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 33 <http://wenshu.court.gov.cn> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 34 <http://tingshen.court.gov.cn> geraadpleegd op 18 November 2016. 35 "Implementatie in de zon is krachtig" <http://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2016/11/ id/2335287.shtml> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 36 Deel II, sectie 1, 2 , TNODR
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
online negotiation, arbitration and conciliation with the participation of third party.
Some ODR platforms supply a specific service, while others supply different ODR
methods and the concrete one would be decided by the party. Most of the ODR
platforms in China haven't distinguished the domestic or cross-border transaction.
2.3.1 Online Negotiation
Online negotiation, the other name is "online conciliation", refers to negotiation
with the utilizing of internet technology, which is often the basis of other methods. 37
Through the private communication between the parties, many disputes would be
solved economically. It's a kind of self-help way and especially plays an important
role in low-value transactions. It is different from the online negotiation of Taobao,
because the platform of online negotiation of ODR is independent from both parties;
while the latter has the interests with both parties.
In China, the representatives of the specific online negotiation platform are China
Consumers Association Complaint, Conciliation and Supervision Platform (CCA
Platform),
38 and some local ones such as Pudong New Area Zero Power Dispute
Coordinate Service Platform (Pudong Platform).
39 The former is a right protection
website created by China Consumers Association (CCA), with the intention of
setting up a way "to consult and conciliate with business operators"
40 regulated in
Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and
Interests. Pudong Platform is an e-commerce trusted environmental portal and a
third party public service platform, charged by Shanghai Pudong New Area
Commerce Commission and Pudong E-commerce Sector Association. According to
the delegation of the government, the platform is to establish a trusted transaction
environment and supply the fundamental service for the e-commerce.
2.3.2 Online Mediation
Online Mediation refers to a neutral third party be the mediator to solve the
dispute in a confidential online chatroom or online video meeting. Presently, few
specific platform supplies the ODR mediation service and most of them are
combined with online arbitration, which can give the consumers more choices.
37 Douglas Walton and David M Godden "Persuasion dialogue in online dispute resolution" (2005)
13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273–295, 275.
38 accessed 18 November 2016.
39 accessed 18 November 2016.
40 Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests,
Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, Order No 7 of the President of the People's
Republic of China (25 October 2013), art 39 (1).
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 201
Generally, the website which supplies the online mediation will publish its rules and
procedures on its platform. After well understanding the rules, the consumer can
submit a mediation application to the platform, which will confirm whether the
respondent is willing to participate in the online mediation. If there is a consent, the
parties will choose the mediators, just like the traditional mediation procedure, or the
platform appoints the mediator.
The representatives of online mediation is Shenzhen Zhongxin E-commerce
Transaction Safeguard and Promotion Centre (Zhongxin Centre), which is delegated
by the government and established by Shenzhen Market Regulatory Bureau and
Futian District Government.
41 The platform particularly created Shenzhen
Cross-border E-commerce Credible Transaction Security System to solve
cross-border e-commerce transaction. Through services of online consultation,
online complaint, online mediation, consumer precaution and guidance, and credit
evaluation, Shenzhen Zhongxin Centre has got certain achievements to help the
consumers to smoothly solve the disputes out of court.
2.3.3. Online Arbitration
Being a dispute resolution method, the operation rules and judgment principles
are similar between online arbitration and traditional arbitration. The main
difference is that the carrier and method to transfer the information of online
arbitration is the Internet.
On basis of whether the arbitration award has the judicial enforceability, some
scholar divided the online arbitration into 2 categories: binding and non-binding.42
Binding online arbitration is conducted by the government arbitration institutions,
which refers to the award that has the judicial enforceability and confirmed by the
national law. Its effect is equal to the legality of traditional arbitration; non-binding
is not conducted by the government arbitration institution, which means the award is
not recognized by the laws, without the judicial enforceability. The effect of
non-binding award is similar to a contract.
43 According to China Arbitration Law,
41 accessed 18 November
2016.
42 Li Hu Research on Online Arbitration (Beijing, China Democracy and Law Press, 2005) 32.
43 Gao Wei "Legal Analysis on Non-Binding Online Arbitration to Solve E-commerce Dispute"
(2012) 2 Academic Journal of Zhongzhou 76-80.
202 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
only arbitration commission44 could be the arbitration institution. Therefore, in
China, only binding online arbitration is permitted.
In December 2000, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration
Commission (CIETAC) established the "Online Dispute Resolution Centre", to
solve the domain disputes online.45 In recent years, CIETAC began to find a way to
solve online e-commerce disputes. In 2009, it promulgated Online Arbitration Rules
of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration, which is the first formal
online arbitration rule in China.46 To rapidly, economically and efficiently solve the
e-commerce disputes in big-amount and low-value, besides the general procedure, it
also sets final procedure47 and expedited procedure48 according to different amount
of the transaction. This is a significant development of China ODR. Pursuant to this
national online arbitration rule, several local arbitration institutions have also
attempted the online arbitration method, such as 2015 Online Arbitration Rules of
China Guangzhou Arbitration Commission,49 Specific Online Arbitration Rules on
Online Transaction dispute in Low-value of China Guangzhou Arbitration
Commission,
50 and 2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules which
also introduced online arbitration articles. 51 Those rules has clarified that the
arbitration agreement could be in forms of data messages, including telegrams,
telexes, faxes, electronic data interchange and emails, etc.,52 and recognized the
validity of electronic signature.53 Therefore, parties of the arbitration could realize
44 Chapter II, Arbitration Commissions and the Arbitration Association, Arbitration Law, Standing
Committee of the National People's Congress, 31 August 1994. See also, Susan R Patterson and D
Grant Seabolt Essentials of Alternative Dispute Resolution (2nd ed, Dallas, Pearson Publications
2001) 115.
45 accessed 19 November 2016.
46 accessed 19 November 2016.
47 Online Arbitration Law, Chapter IV.
48 Ibid Chapter V.
49 Online Arbitration Rules of China Guangzhou Arbitration Commission 2015
accessed 19 November 2016.
50 "Specific Online Arbitration Rules on Online Transaction dispute in Low-value of China
Guangzhou Arbitration Commission" accessed 19 November 2016.
51 "2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules" accessed 19 November 2016.
52 Online Arbitration Rules, art 2(7).
53 Ibid art 29.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 203
online arbitration from the signing arbitration agreement to submitting various
evidences, without going to the arbitration institution in person. It's necessary to
indicate that Guangzhou Arbitration Commission has firstly defined that "low-value
online transaction" is under RMB 10,000.
54
Generally, Chinese ODS mechanism has the basic built up. The next question is
whether all of the channels have functioned well.
III COMPARING OF THE PRACTICE CONDITION AMONG
VARIOUS ODS PLATFORMS
In China, the development of different ODS channel is imbalanced. The paper
will access their performance from aspect of speed, procedure, neutrality, fairness,
professionality, validity, expense and popularity. "1" represents the best, "2" is
moderate, and "3" is not so good.
Internal platform of e-commerce ODR Online court
Speed 1 2 3
Procedure 1 2 3
Neutrality 3 1 1
Fairness 3 2 1
Professionality 3 2 1
Expense 1 3
55 2
Validity 3 2 1
Popularity 1 3 2
Table 1 Assessment index of each way to solve online dispute
The time span of different platforms to deal with a dispute is respectively:
56
Taobao or Tmall consumer service and public review, in 7 days after it decided to
intervene in the dispute;
57 CIETAC, the most rapid expedited procedure time is in
15 days after the formation of the arbitration tribunal;
58 Court, summary procedure
54 Specific Online Arbitration Rules on Online Transaction dispute in Small Amount of China
Guangzhou Arbitration Commission, art 2.
55 Here it refers to arbitration, other ODR methods in China are all free.
56 Not every platform has disclosed the settlement procedure rules. Here and the following
comparisons are only about what has been regulated.
57 accessed 3 January 2017.
58 Online Arbitration Rules of CIETAC, art 50.
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE online onderhandeling, arbitrage en bemiddeling met deelname van een derde partij. Sommige ODR-platforms leveren een specifieke dienst, terwijl andere verschillende ODR-methoden leveren en de concrete zal door de partij worden bepaald. De meeste ODR-platforms in China hebben geen onderscheid gemaakt tussen binnenlandse of grensoverschrijdende transacties. 2.3.1 Online onderhandelen Online onderhandelen, de andere naam is "online bemiddeling", verwijst naar onderhandelen met behulp van internettechnologie, die vaak de basis vormt van andere methoden. 37 Door de privécommunicatie tussen de partijen zouden veel geschillen economisch worden opgelost. Het is een soort zelfhulpmiddel en speelt vooral een belangrijke rol bij transacties met een lage waarde. Het is anders dan de online onderhandeling van Taobao, omdat het platform voor online onderhandeling van ODR onafhankelijk is van beide partijen; terwijl de laatste de belangen bij beide partijen heeft. In China zijn de vertegenwoordigers van het specifieke online onderhandelingsplatform China Consumers Association Complaint, Conciliation and Supervision Platform (CCA Platform), 38 en enkele lokale zoals Pudong New Area Zero Power Dispute Coordinate Service Platform (Pudong Platform). 39 De eerste is een website voor de bescherming van rechten die is opgericht door de China Consumers Association (CCA), met de bedoeling een manier op te zetten "om te overleggen en te bemiddelen met bedrijfsexploitanten" 40 die is geregeld in de wet van de Volksrepubliek China inzake de bescherming van consumentenrechten en Interesses. Pudong Platform is een vertrouwd milieuportaal voor e-commerce en een openbaar serviceplatform van derden, in rekening gebracht door de Shanghai Pudong New Area Commerce Commission en de Pudong E-commerce Sector Association. Volgens de delegatie van de regering moet het platform een vertrouwde transactieomgeving tot stand brengen en de fundamentele service voor de e-commerce leveren. 2.3.2 Online Mediation Online Mediation verwijst naar een neutrale derde partij die de bemiddelaar is om het geschil op te lossen in een vertrouwelijke online chatroom of online videovergadering. Momenteel zijn er weinig specifieke platforms die de ODR-bemiddelingsdienst leveren en de meeste worden gecombineerd met online arbitrage, waardoor de consument meer keuzemogelijkheden heeft. 37 Douglas Walton en David M Godden "Overtuigingsdialoog in online geschillenbeslechting" (2005) 13 Artificial Intelligence and Law 273-295, 275. 38 <http://hjxt.cca.cn> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 39 <www. shodr.org> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 40 Wet van de Volksrepubliek China inzake de bescherming van consumentenrechten en -belangen, Permanent Comité van het Nationale Volkscongres, Besluit nr. 7 van de president van de Volksrepubliek China (25 oktober 2013 ), artikel 39 (1). IN CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 201 Over het algemeen zal de website die de online mediation aanbiedt, haar regels en procedures op haar platform publiceren. Na een goed begrip van de regels kan de consument een bemiddelingsaanvraag indienen bij het platform, waarin wordt bevestigd of de respondent bereid is om deel te nemen aan de online bemiddeling. Als er overeenstemming is, kiezen partijen de mediators, net als bij de traditionele mediationprocedure, of wijst het platform de mediator aan. De vertegenwoordigers van online bemiddeling zijn het Shenzhen Zhongxin E-commerce Transaction Safeguard and Promotion Centre (Zhongxin Centre), dat is gedelegeerd door de overheid en is opgericht door het Shenzhen Market Regulatory Bureau en de Futian District Government. 41 Het platform creëerde met name Shenzhen Cross-border E-commerce Credible Transaction Security System om grensoverschrijdende e-commerce transacties op te lossen. Door middel van online consultatie, online klachten, online bemiddeling, voorzorg en begeleiding van consumenten, en kredietevaluatie, heeft Shenzhen Zhongxin Center bepaalde resultaten behaald om de consumenten te helpen de geschillen soepel buiten de rechtbank op te lossen. 2.3.3. Online arbitrage Omdat het een methode voor geschillenbeslechting is, zijn de werkingsregels en beoordelingsprincipes vergelijkbaar tussen online arbitrage en traditionele arbitrage. Het belangrijkste verschil is dat de vervoerder en methode om de informatie van online arbitrage over te dragen het internet is. Op basis van de vraag of de arbitrage-uitspraak gerechtelijke afdwingbaar is, heeft een geleerde de online arbitrage in 2 categorieën verdeeld: bindend en niet-bindend.42 Bindende online arbitrage wordt uitgevoerd door de arbitrage-instanties van de overheid, wat verwijst naar de uitspraak die de gerechtelijke afdwingbaarheid heeft. en bevestigd door de nationale wetgeving. Het effect is gelijk aan de wettigheid van traditionele arbitrage; niet-bindend wordt niet uitgevoerd door de arbitrage-instantie van de overheid, wat betekent dat de uitspraak niet door de wetten wordt erkend, zonder de gerechtelijke afdwingbaarheid. Het effect van niet-bindende gunning is vergelijkbaar met een contract. 43 Volgens China Arbitration Law, 41 <www.ebs.org.cn/AboutUs/Index.html?navIndex=5&subNavIndex=0> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 42 Li Hu Research on Online Arbitration (Beijing, China Democracy and Law Press, 2005) 32. 43 Gao Wei "Juridische analyse van niet-bindende online arbitrage om geschillen over e-commerce op te lossen" (2012) 2 Academic Journal of Zhongzhou 76-80. 202 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE alleen arbitragecommissie44 zou de arbitrage-instelling kunnen zijn. Daarom is in China alleen bindende online arbitrage toegestaan. In december 2000 richtte de China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) het "Online Dispute Resolution Centre" op om de domeingeschillen online op te lossen.45 De afgelopen jaren begon CIETAC een manier te vinden om online e-commercegeschillen op te lossen. In 2009 vaardigde het de Online Arbitration Rules of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration uit, de eerste formele online arbitrageregel in China.46 Om de e-commercegeschillen in grote hoeveelheden en met een lage waarde snel, economisch en efficiënt op te lossen, naast de algemene procedure stelt het ook de definitieve procedure47 en de versnelde procedure48 vast op basis van het verschillende bedrag van de transactie. Dit is een belangrijke ontwikkeling van China ODR. Op grond van deze nationale online arbitrageregel hebben verschillende lokale arbitrage-instellingen ook de online arbitragemethode geprobeerd, zoals de 2015 Online Arbitration Rules of China Guangzhou Arbitration Commission,49 Specifieke online arbitrageregels voor geschillen over onlinetransacties in de arbitragecommissie van China met een lage waarde , 50 en 2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules die ook online arbitrageartikelen introduceerden. 51 Die regels hebben verduidelijkt dat de arbitrageovereenkomst in de vorm van databerichten kan zijn, waaronder telegrammen, telexen, faxen, elektronische gegevensuitwisseling en e-mails, enz.52 en erkenden de geldigheid van elektronische handtekening.53 Daarom konden partijen bij de arbitrage realiseren 44 Chapter II, Arbitration Commissions and the Arbitration Association, Arbitration Law, Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, 31 augustus 1994. Zie ook Susan R Patterson en D Grant Seabolt Essentials of Alternative Dispute Resolution (2e druk, Dallas, Pearson Publications 2001) 115. 45 <http://dndrc.cietac.org> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 46 <www.cietacodr.org> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 47 Online arbitragerecht, hoofdstuk IV. 48 Ibid Hoofdstuk V. 49 Online arbitrageregels van de Chinese Guangzhou Arbitragecommissie 2015 <www.gzac.org/WEB_CN/AboutInfo.aspx?AboutType=4&KeyID=100b1ae3-9f15-4bfc-bf59-a 90273778fa5> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 50 " Specifieke online arbitrageregels voor geschillen over onlinetransacties in de arbitragecommissie van Guangzhou van lage waarde" <http://www.gzac.org/WEB_CN/AboutInfo.aspx?About Type=4&KeyID=09600071-6843-4990-9bae-dcfbaf55e927> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 51 "2016 Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Rules" <www.sccietac.org/web/doc/view_rules/856.html> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 52 Online Arbitration Rules, art 2(7). 53 Ibid. art 29. ON CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 203 online arbitrage vanaf de ondertekening van de arbitrageovereenkomst tot het overleggen van diverse bewijzen, zonder persoonlijk naar de arbitrage-instantie te gaan. Het is noodzakelijk om aan te geven dat de arbitragecommissie van Guangzhou in de eerste plaats heeft gedefinieerd dat "online transacties met een lage waarde" minder dan RMB 10.000 bedragen. 54 Over het algemeen heeft het Chinese ODS-mechanisme de basis opgebouwd. De volgende vraag is of alle kanalen goed hebben gefunctioneerd. III VERGELIJKING VAN DE PRAKTIJKSTAND ONDER VERSCHILLENDE ODS-PLATFORMS In China is de ontwikkeling van verschillende ODS-kanalen onevenwichtig. Het papier zal toegang krijgen tot hun prestaties vanuit het aspect snelheid, procedure, neutraliteit, eerlijkheid, professionaliteit, validiteit, kosten en populariteit. "1" staat voor het beste, "2" is matig en "3" is niet zo goed. Intern platform van e-commerce ODR Online rechtbank Snelheid 1 2 3 Procedure 1 2 3 Neutraliteit 3 1 1 Eerlijkheid 3 2 1 Professionaliteit 3 2 1 Kosten 1 3 55 2 Geldigheid 3 2 1 Populariteit 1 3 2 Tabel 1 Beoordelingsindex van elke weg naar online geschil oplossen De tijdspanne van verschillende platforms om een geschil te behandelen is respectievelijk: 56 Taobao of Tmall consumentenservice en openbare beoordeling, in 7 dagen nadat het besluit om in het geschil tussenbeide te komen; 57 CIETAC, de snelste proceduretijd is 15 dagen na de vorming van het scheidsgerecht; 58 Rechtbank, kortgedingprocedure 54 Specifieke online arbitrageregels voor geschillen over online transacties in kleine hoeveelheden China Arbitragecommissie van Guangzhou, art 2. 55 Hier verwijst het naar arbitrage, andere ODR-methoden in China zijn allemaal gratis. 56 Niet elk platform heeft de regels van de afwikkelingsprocedure bekendgemaakt. Hier en de volgende vergelijkingen gaan alleen over wat is gereguleerd. 57 <http://support.taobao.com/myservice/rights/right_main.htm> geraadpleegd op 3 januari 2017. 58 Online arbitrageregels van CIETAC, art 50.
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
in 3 months.59 Therefore, the fast settlement channel is the internal ODS mechanism
of the e-commerce platform, which is one of its biggest advantage.
In fact, the settlement speed is closely related to the complexity of the procedure.
Usually, the simpler of the procedure, the shorter the time spent on solving the
problem. Comparing the three channels, the procedure of Alibaba is the simplest:
consult – apply the intervening of consumer service or public review – submit the
evidence – make final decision; ODR is more complex in 2 folds: (1) although the
negotiation and mediation procedure is similar with that of Taobao, but it's more
difficult to collect evidence, because being the e-commerce platform, all transaction
marks left on Alibaba platform could be directly taken as the evidence. However,
ODR platform is an independent third party, all evidences should be collected by the
parties and submitted to the platform; (2) Online arbitration procedure is the same
with the offline arbitration, which would be more complex than that of Taobao.60
Furthermore, the procedure of online trial should accord with the Civil Procedure
Law, which is the most complex generally.
As for the neutrality, ODR and online trial is much better than that of Alibaba.
The internal ODS mechanism is supplied by the e-commerce transaction platform
itself, the consumer service is the employee of the platform, and the reviewer of the
public review platform is also the buyer or seller from the platform. It's inevitable
that the third party could have more or less interest or relationship with the platform,
which could impact the neutrality of the third party. On the contrary, no matter ODR
or online trial, the mediator, arbitrator or the judge is an independent third party and
more neutral.
The neutrality and independence will influence the fairness of the final decision.
In practice, there are many complaints and blames on the fairness of the consumer
service of Taobao. What could more serious is the corruption problem of consumer
service: from the early disguised means such as reputation forgery and bad
evaluation deletion, to directly obtaining improper benefits such as accepting the
bribe.
61 Since 2012, Taobao has closed many e-commerce shops forever and
launched the judicial procedure, which has the suspected bribery to the consumer
59 China Civil Procedural Law, art 161.
60 The arbitration procedure in China is: arbitration agreement – the claimant apply for the online
arbitration - the form of the online arbitration panel – the respondent make the defence – evidence
submission – arbitrate online – make the decision.
61 "Surprising Internal Investigation of Taobao Corruption"
accessed 2 January 2017.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 205
service.62 However, the third party of ODR and the judge of online trial, which has
no interest with the parties, would be fairer. Combing the consideration of the
professionality and the coercive power, online trial is comparatively fairer than
ODR.
One of the reasons why the consumer service is easy to be involved in the bribery
scandal maybe because there is no specific qualification requirement to be a
consumer service, also, the auxiliary supervision and penalty system is in blank. On
the contrary, it's worthy to point out in Public Review system, to be a reviewer, one
must satisfy with some requirements. No matter the buyer or seller, both can apply
for the reviewer, only if he is a Taobao member and the registration time is up to 1
year, as well as Alipay has verified the real identification (ID) of the reviewers. At
the same time, the buyer and the seller should meet other prerequisites such as
credit, transaction amount and rule compliance condition, etc.,63 which could also
facilitate the reviewer to make a more informed judgment.
As for the expense on low-value disputes, the internal ODS mechanism of the
e-commerce platform and ODR methods, except arbitration, are free. Online court
is RMB 50 for each case if the object sum is under RMB 10,000.64 The most
expensive method is arbitration. In 2014, Online Arbitration Rules of CIETAC has
regulated the calculation method of the case-acceptation fees according to different
involving value of the case, the minimum is RMB 100.
65 Therefore, online
arbitration is the most expensive way to settle low-value e-commerce disputes.
At last, let's check the popularity of different channels in China. In general, the
dispute settlement mechanism of Alibaba has operated well. Although there is lack
of recent statistics, according to Consumer Protection White Book, published by
Taobao in July 2011, in the early half year of 2011, Taobao has accepted and dealt
with 2,631,000 complaints and successfully protected RMB 190,000,000 damages.66
From 25 December 2015 to 25 October 2016, the report platform of Taobao has
attracted more than 800,000 social persons to participate the platform governance
62 "Anti-corruption of Alibaba" accessed 2 January
2017.
63 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 4.
64 Measures on the Payment of Litigation Costs，State Council (19 December 2006), art 13(1).
65 "Arbitration Fee" accessed 19
November 2016.
66 "Taobao Has Conducted 2,600,000 Cases Concerning Consumer Right Protection in the Early
Half Year" accessed 16 November 2016.
206 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
and accumulatively got 4,230,000 report messages through Report to Taobao.
67
Until 26 November 2016, there were 1,026,117 public reviewers to make a judgment
on 2,174,498 cases through public review platform. Comparatively, online trial
cases were much less. From 12 August 2015 to 26 November 2016, Zhejiang
e-commerce online courts have accepted 1,897 cases, among which e-commerce
transaction disputes accounted to 1,052 cases.68 Regarding the cases settled by
ODR, it's surprisingly poor. Viewing the typical cases in CCA, although it has
published some cases, no evidence is shown that they were settled by the CCA
platform. Besides, from 1 March 2013 to 17 July 2014, there were 70 cases solved on
Pudong Platform, and after 2014, no cases were disclosed.69 Additionally, since
April 2014 till now, only 18 cases were solved on the Shenzhen Zhongxin Centre
platform, including 2 cross-border disputes.70 As for online arbitration, there is no
specific number about online arbitration, but the total number of 2005 is 1,968
cases.
71 Although the above statistics is not in the same period, it's enough to get
some preliminary indication of the general trend because of the gigantic difference
among them, that is, in China, the internal ODS system of the e-commerce platform
is the most welcomed.
IV CAUSATION ANALYSIS OF CHINA ODS DEVELOPMENT
STATUS
An impartial, quick, and affordable dispute resolution system can reduce the
uncertainty associated with e-commerce, and enhance confidence in online markets
and trade.72 Comprehensively evaluating the various index according to Table 1, it
seems like online trial should have been the most popular channel in China because
it has got the most No "1". Additionally, in China, there is always a traditional
"Moderate" ideology73 existing. In the assessment, ODR has got the most No "2",
67 Alibaba Group (n 24) 6.
68 accessed 26 November 2016.
69 accessed 18 November 2016.
70 accessed 18
November 2016. See also accessed 18 November 2016.
71 accessed 15 January 2017.
72 Ofir Turel and Yufei Yuan "Online dispute resolution services for electronic markets: a user
centric research agenda" (2007) 5(6) International Journal of Electronic Business 590-603.
73 "Moderate" ideology is a compromise attitude avoid leaning to either side and the "middle" is the
best. It's a Confucian idea and from the famous classic literature "Zhong Yong", written by Zi Si,
in Li Ji. Later, it became one of the life philosophy of Chinese people.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 207
which should have been the most correspondent to Chinese traditional culture. But
the truth is just on the contrary: the internal ODS mechanism is much more
welcomed than other two channels, followed by online court. The main reasons are
as following:
UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE in 3 maanden.59 Daarom is het snelle afwikkelingskanaal het interne ODS-mechanisme van het e-commerceplatform, wat een van zijn grootste voordelen is. De afwikkelingssnelheid hangt namelijk nauw samen met de complexiteit van de procedure. Gewoonlijk geldt: hoe eenvoudiger de procedure, hoe korter de tijd die wordt besteed aan het oplossen van het probleem. Als we de drie kanalen vergelijken, is de procedure van Alibaba de eenvoudigste: raadplegen - tussenkomst van de consumentendienst of openbare beoordeling toepassen - het bewijsmateriaal indienen - definitieve beslissing nemen; ODR is in twee opzichten complexer: (1) hoewel de onderhandelings- en bemiddelingsprocedure vergelijkbaar is met die van Taobao, maar het is moeilijker om bewijs te verzamelen, omdat het het e-commerceplatform is, alle transactiemarkeringen die op het Alibaba-platform achterblijven direct kunnen worden genomen als bewijs. Het ODR-platform is echter een onafhankelijke derde partij, alle bewijzen moeten door de partijen worden verzameld en aan het platform worden voorgelegd; (2) De procedure voor online arbitrage is hetzelfde als voor de offline arbitrage, die ingewikkelder zou zijn dan die van Taobao.60 Bovendien moet de procedure van online proces in overeenstemming zijn met de Wet op de burgerlijke rechtsvordering, die in het algemeen de meest complexe is. Wat betreft de neutraliteit, ODR en online proef is veel beter dan die van Alibaba. Het interne ODS-mechanisme wordt geleverd door het e-commerce transactieplatform zelf, de consumentenservice is de medewerker van het platform en de recensent van het openbare beoordelingsplatform is ook de koper of verkoper van het platform. Het is onvermijdelijk dat de derde partij meer of minder interesse of relatie heeft met het platform, wat de neutraliteit van de derde partij kan aantasten. Integendeel, ongeacht ODR of online proces, de bemiddelaar, arbiter of de rechter is een onafhankelijke derde partij en neutraler. De neutraliteit en onafhankelijkheid zullen de eerlijkheid van de uiteindelijke beslissing beĂŻnvloeden. In de praktijk zijn er veel klachten en verwijten over de eerlijkheid van de consumentenservice van Taobao. Wat nog ernstiger zou kunnen zijn, is het corruptieprobleem van de consumentendienst: van de vroege verkapte middelen zoals reputatievervalsing en het verwijderen van slechte evaluaties, tot het rechtstreeks verkrijgen van ongepaste voordelen, zoals het aannemen van steekpenningen. 61 Sinds 2012 heeft Taobao veel e-commerce winkels voor altijd gesloten en de gerechtelijke procedure gestart, waarbij de verdachte van omkoping is terechtgekomen bij de consument 59 China Civil Procedural Law, art 161. 60 De arbitrageprocedure in China is: arbitrageovereenkomst – de eiser past voor de online arbitrage - de vorm van het online arbitragepanel - de verweerder voert de verdediging - indiening van bewijsmateriaal - arbitreert online - neemt de beslissing. 61 "Verrassend intern onderzoek naar corruptie in Taobao" <http://b2b.toocle.com/detail--6185290.html> geraadpleegd op 2 januari 2017. OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 205 service.62 De derde partij van ODR en de rechter van online proces, die geen belang heeft bij de partijen, zou eerlijker zijn. Door de overweging van de professionaliteit en de dwangkracht te combineren, is online proef relatief eerlijker dan ODR. Een van de redenen waarom de consumentendienst zo gemakkelijk bij het omkopingsschandaal betrokken kan worden, is misschien omdat er geen specifieke kwalificatie-eis is om een consumentendienst te zijn. Integendeel, het is de moeite waard om erop te wijzen dat je in het Public Review-systeem aan een aantal vereisten moet voldoen om een recensent te zijn. Ongeacht de koper of verkoper, beide kunnen de reviewer aanvragen, alleen als hij een Taobao-lid is en de registratietijd maximaal 1 jaar is, en Alipay de echte identificatie (ID) van de reviewers heeft geverifieerd. Tegelijkertijd moeten de koper en de verkoper aan andere voorwaarden voldoen, zoals krediet, transactiebedrag en nalevingsvoorwaarde, enz.63, wat de beoordelaar ook zou kunnen vergemakkelijken om een beter geĂŻnformeerd oordeel te vellen. Wat betreft de kosten voor geschillen met een lage waarde, zijn het interne ODS-mechanisme van het e-commerceplatform en de ODR-methoden, behalve arbitrage, gratis. Online rechtbank is RMB 50 voor elke zaak als het objectbedrag lager is dan RMB 10.000,64 De duurste methode is arbitrage. In 2014 hebben de online arbitrageregels van CIETAC de berekeningsmethode van de honoraria voor de acceptatie van de zaak gereguleerd op basis van de verschillende waarde van de zaak, het minimum is RMB 100. 65 Daarom is online arbitrage de duurste manier om e - handelsgeschillen. Laten we ten slotte de populariteit van verschillende kanalen in China eens bekijken. Over het algemeen heeft het geschillenbeslechtingsmechanisme van Alibaba goed gefunctioneerd. Hoewel recente statistieken ontbreken, heeft Taobao volgens het Consumer Protection White Book, gepubliceerd door Taobao in juli 2011, in het eerste halfjaar van 2011 2.631.000 klachten aanvaard en afgehandeld en met succes een schadevergoeding van RMB 190.000.000 beschermd.66 Vanaf 25 december 2015 tot 25 oktober 2016 heeft het rapportplatform van Taobao meer dan 800.000 sociale personen aangetrokken om deel te nemen aan het platformbeheer 62 "Anti-corruptie van Alibaba" <http://tech.qq.com/a/20150325/026972.htm> geraadpleegd 2 januari 2017. 63 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 4. 64 Maatregelen inzake de betaling van proceskosten，Staatsraad (19 december 2006), art 13(1). 65 "Arbitragekosten" <www.cietac.org/index.php?m=Page&a=index&id=121> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 66 "Taobao heeft 2.600.000 zaken gevoerd met betrekking tot de bescherming van consumentenrechten in het eerste halfjaar" <www.ebrun .com/ebnews/23911.html> bezocht op 16 november 2016. 206 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE en kreeg in totaal 4.230.000 rapportberichten via Report to Taobao. 67 Tot 26 november 2016 waren er 1.026.117 openbare reviewers om een oordeel te vellen over 2.174.498 zaken via het openbare reviewplatform. Ter vergelijking: online proefgevallen waren veel minder. Van 12 augustus 2015 tot 26 november 2016 hebben de e-commerce rechtbanken van Zhejiang 1.897 zaken geaccepteerd, waaronder 1.052 zaken over e-commercetransactiegeschillen.68 Wat betreft de zaken die door ODR zijn beslecht, is het verrassend slecht. Bij het bekijken van de typische gevallen in CCA, hoewel het enkele gevallen heeft gepubliceerd, is er geen bewijs dat ze door het CCA-platform zijn afgehandeld. Bovendien zijn er van 1 maart 2013 tot 17 juli 2014 70 zaken opgelost op het Pudong Platform, en na 2014 zijn er geen zaken meer bekendgemaakt.69 Bovendien zijn sinds april 2014 tot nu toe slechts 18 zaken opgelost op het Shenzhen Zhongxin Center-platform, inclusief 2 grensoverschrijdende geschillen.70 Wat online arbitrage betreft, is er geen specifiek aantal over online arbitrage, maar het totale aantal van 2005 is 1.968 zaken. 71 Hoewel de bovenstaande statistieken zich niet in dezelfde periode bevinden, volstaat het om een voorlopige indicatie te krijgen van de algemene trend vanwege het gigantische verschil tussen hen, dat wil zeggen dat in China het interne ODS-systeem van het e-commerceplatform het meest welkom. IV ANALYSE VAN DE OORZAAK VAN DE ONTWIKKELINGSSTATUS VAN DE ODS VAN CHINA Een onpartijdig, snel en betaalbaar systeem voor geschillenbeslechting kan de onzekerheid in verband met e-commerce verminderen en het vertrouwen in online markten en handel vergroten.72 Uitvoerige evaluatie van de verschillende indexen volgens tabel 1, lijkt het zoals online proefversie het populairste kanaal in China had moeten zijn omdat het de meeste "1" heeft. Bovendien bestaat er in China altijd een traditionele "gematigde" ideologie73. In de beoordeling heeft ODR de meeste No "2", 67 Alibaba Group (n 24) 6. 68 <www.zjwsft.gov.cn/portal/main/domain/index.htm> geraadpleegd op 26 november 2016. 69 < www.shodr.org/Article/ArticleTagSearch.aspx?Dir=54&Page=5> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 70 <http://kj.ebs.org.cn/news/detail/bdeb4dfa-7abb-4c7e-9848-612f3c9ba61a > geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. Zie ook <http://odr.ebs.org.cn/news/CaseDetail/3e05ec69-2bcc-4915-91ee-0c9 1a3bbaf69> geraadpleegd op 18 november 2016. 71 <www.cietac.org/index .php?m=Page&a=index&id=24> geraadpleegd op 15 januari 2017. 72 Ofir Turel en Yufei Yuan "Online geschillenbeslechtingsdiensten voor elektronische markten: een gebruikersgerichte onderzoeksagenda" (2007) 5(6) International Journal of Electronic Business 590 -603. 73 "Gematigde" ideologie is een compromishouding, vermijd naar beide kanten te leunen en het "midden" is het beste. Het is een confuciaans idee en uit de beroemde klassieke literatuur "Zhong Yong", geschreven door Zi Si, in Li Ji. Later werd het een van de levensfilosofieĂ«n van Chinese mensen. ON CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 207 die het meest overeen had moeten komen met de traditionele Chinese cultuur. Maar de waarheid is juist integendeel: het interne ODS-mechanisme is veel meer welkom dan andere twee kanalen, gevolgd door online rechtbanken. De belangrijkste redenen zijn als volgt:
4.1 Scientific Design of Internal ODS System of Alibaba
The huge numbers have shown that the design of this internal ODS system is
scientific, reasonable, low cost and high efficiency.
4.1.1 Modularization of the Platform Design
Taobao has found that under different categories of the commodities, the dispute
causes and settlement results are always in convergence. Through market
investigation and statistics analysis, Taobao summarized the most regular disputes
causes, including commodity damaged; wrong or missed distribution; commodity
needs repair; the commodity is not conformity with the description; quality problem;
and the commodity is not delivered at the promised time, etc. And the settlement
methods are summarized as change; return; and refund, etc. When designing the
dispute settlement procedure, Tabao utilized this kind of modularization method to
give the complainants choice. For the complainant, on one hand, it could save time to
describe what problem he has met; on the other hand, the result could be predicted.
Moreover, it could impel the consumer services to be more professional when they
intervene the disputes.74
4.1.2 Strictly Comply With the Time Limits
Figure 3 shows that each step of the dispute settlement procedure is controlled
with the restricted time. For example, after 3 days of the submission of application of
refund, the buyer could apply for Taobao consumer service intervening, who will
make the decision to intervene the dispute in 2 days and then make the final decision
in 15 days.75 Dispute settlement should comply with this pace, which is also the
important content to safeguard the procedural justice. If any party could not submit
the evidences in the prescribed time, it would fail. However, for ODR, except
arbitration, the time limit is very vague.
74 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Structuring Right Protection
and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Inside and Outside of Court 7-11.
75 "Question on Time Used to Deal with the Dispute by Consumer Service of Taobao"
accessed 16 November 2016.
208 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
4.1.3 Be Coincided With the Characteristics of E-Commerce
According to the comparison, Taobao ODS platform has the characteristics of
high speed, simple procedure and low expense. Its popularity has testified that in
B2C and C2C disputes, efficiency and economy are more important than fairness,
neutrality, professionality and validity, which are just coincided with the
characteristics of e-commerce.
4.1.4 Social Participation to Jointly Construct E-Commerce Ecosystem
Through public review and report to Taobao, Taobao has introduced the social
power, including the excellent buyer and seller to jointly participate the construction
and governance of Ali e-commerce ecosystem. There are so many transactions on
Taobao every day, it's hard to avoid that sometimes the consumer service is not
familiar with the phenomenon. Furthermore, since the evidence principle of Taobao
is "the product and the description are identical on surface",
76 public review could
bring in more knowledgeable person to judge a case. From the justice aspect, the
system utilizes the method of delivering the task to the interviewer at random77 and
challenge system to effectively prevent the reviewer to select cases for his own
interests.78 Moreover, either the buyer or the seller could participate the public
review and report, so it's a good chance to make the market education to the
participant to let them know the causes of the disputes, and then to avoid the
disputes. The most outstanding point is that the system is a way to realize social
cooperative governance.79
Of course, the limitations of the Taobao ODS mechanism is also obvious, such as
the rules are uncertain; the decision has no legal binding; the fact ascertaining
methods are limited;80 the third party to help to settle down the dispute could have
interests with both parties; lack of supervision and regulatory mechanism; the
fairness of the decision is doubtful; 81 and the unreasonable immunity of
responsibility of platform itself,
82 etc. That is just the reason why other channels are
76 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 101.
77 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 9.
78 Ibid art 5.
79 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Structuring Right Protection
and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Inside and Outside of Court 7-11.
80 Zheng Jun "On Development of ODR in China – Taking Taobao Dispute Settlement Model as the
Example" (2014) 20 Legal System and Society 44-45.
81 Luo Xiulan (n 10) 57-65.
82 Zheng Jun (n 80) 44-45.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 209
also necessary. Being a non-independent third party, the internal ODS mechanism
could never substitute other external systems. However, in the context that there are
still no relevant formal e-commerce laws in China, for the characteristics of rapid,
large volume and low value of B2C and C2C transactions, the internal ODS model is
undoubtful the most direct and efficient way to solve online disputes.
4.2 Obstacles and Challenges of ODR Development in China
From the current development situation of ODS, for the merits of economy,
efficiency and flexibility, in China, the internal ODS mechanism of the e-commerce
platform is the most welcomed; and the online court has also been warmed-up with
the advocate of "Internet + Judiciary" reform.83 Only ODR, is not developed well, it
even has the backward tendency. The obstacle and challenge to ODR are more
serious.
4.2.1 Inadequate Legislation
As for internal e-commerce platform, each one has its own rules on dispute
settlement; and although online court has also no specific regulation, there are
relevant procedural laws to be the reference; but in ODR, except the arbitration
institution, others have no specific rules. Therefore, it's difficult to negotiate or
mediate "in the shadow of the law". For the traditional ADR, the disputing parties are
aware of the legal rules governing the area of their dispute. The outcome that the law
will impose if no agreement is reached gives each party a reasonably good idea of its
bargaining position.84 Cortes indicates that "the establishment of a legal framework
in the ODR field for B2C disputes will increase legal certainty, facilitating the
expansion of quality and fair ODR methods."
85 Parties will take the law into
consideration when setting out a strategy in the ADR procedure.86 However, the
legislation of ODR is far from enough to make this kind of negotiation. Online
arbitration has some regulations but still imperfect. In the offline commerce
83 "Convergence and Extension: the Improvement Road of Judiciary Promulgation in Context of
"Internet +'" accessed 15 January
2017.
84 Esther van den Heuvel "Online Dispute Resolution as A Solution to Cross-Border E-Disputes - An
Introduction To ODR", p16 accessed 19
November 2016.
85 Pablo Cortes "Accredited Online Dispute Resolution Services: Creating European Legal
Standards for Ensuring Fair and Effective Processes" (2008) 17(3) Information and
Communications Technology Law 221-237, 224.
86 R Cooter, S Marks and R Mnookin "Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: A Testable Model of
Strategic Behavior" (1982) 11 The Journal of Legal Studies 225-251.
210 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
transaction, due to territorial restriction, even if there are a lot of disputes, the issues
of jurisdiction, applicable law and the enforcement of the award would not often be
challenging. With the continuous development of e-commerce, the consumer could
make transaction with the merchants at every corner of the world. Parties in the
internet environment, especially cross-border transaction, would feel difficult to
solve the problems of applicable law, jurisdiction and enforcement etc., which is not
prescribed in the relevant arbitration regulations.
4.2.2 Limited Acceptance Scope
In China, the ODR platform is very few, no matter the specific ODR supplier, or
traditional mediation or arbitration institutions which could supply ODR service.
Furthermore, usually, ODR platform only accepted cases concerning its member
enterprises, which has restricted the consumers to utilize the platform. As of early
2017 only 48 enterprises were registered on the CCS platform87 and 9 on Pudong
platform.88 As for arbitration, it only supplies binding arbitration, and non-binding
arbitration is illegal in China.
4.2.3 Casual Quit System
Any method to get the jurisdiction over the case needs the consent of both parties.
Except binding online arbitration, as to other ODR methods, if any party is not
willing to utilize ODR, he can retreat from ODR at any time without any cause. This
would make the complaint, who had submitted the acceptance fee, very passive but
with no redress.
4.2.4 Unreasonable Fees
According to 2009 calculation method of arbitration fee made by CIETAC, each
case at least needs RMB 4,000. However, the general online transactions are
low-value. The cost of online arbitration is so high, which is seriously mismatched.
In 2014, it has been changed to minimum RMB 100, which seems that the cost has
been reduced much. However, according to statistics, the involving sum of the
complaint of 2015 in China is respectively: RMB 100 and below accounted for
17.49%; and RMB 100-500 37.57%. (Figure 4) Obviously, 17.49% of the disputes
involving RMB 100 and below would not select online arbitration because the
arbitration fees are over the transaction price or value. 37.57% of the disputes
involving RMB 100-500 may also not firstly select online arbitration, because they
can get effective resolution through the internal mechanism of e-commerce
87 accessed 3 January 2017.
88 accessed 3 January 2017.
4.1 Wetenschappelijk ontwerp van het interne ODS-systeem van Alibaba De enorme aantallen hebben aangetoond dat het ontwerp van dit interne ODS-systeem wetenschappelijk, redelijk, goedkoop en zeer efficiënt is. 4.1.1 Modularisering van het platformontwerp Taobao heeft geconstateerd dat onder verschillende categorieën van goederen de oorzaken van geschillen en de resultaten van de schikking altijd convergeren. Door marktonderzoek en statistische analyse vatte Taobao de meest voorkomende oorzaken van geschillen samen, waaronder beschadigde goederen; verkeerde of gemiste distributie; goederen moeten worden gerepareerd; het goed is niet conform de beschrijving; kwaliteitsprobleem; en de goederen worden niet op het beloofde tijdstip geleverd, enz. En de afwikkelingsmethoden worden samengevat als verandering; opbrengst; en terugbetaling, enz. Bij het ontwerpen van de geschillenbeslechtingsprocedure heeft Tabao dit soort modularisatiemethode gebruikt om de klagers keuze te geven. Voor de klager kan het enerzijds tijd besparen om te beschrijven welk probleem hij heeft ondervonden; aan de andere kant kon het resultaat worden voorspeld. Bovendien zou het de consumentendiensten ertoe kunnen aanzetten om professioneler te zijn wanneer zij tussenkomen in de geschillen.74 4.1.2 Strikt naleven van de termijnen Figuur 3 laat zien dat elke stap van de geschillenbeslechtingsprocedure wordt gecontroleerd met de beperkte tijd. Na 3 dagen na indiening van het verzoek tot terugbetaling kan de koper bijvoorbeeld verzoeken om tussenkomst van de Taobao-consumentendienst, die binnen 2 dagen de beslissing neemt om in het geschil te interveniëren en vervolgens binnen 15 dagen de definitieve beslissing neemt.75 Geschillenbeslechting moet voldoen aan dit tempo, dat ook de belangrijke inhoud is om de procedurele rechtvaardigheid te waarborgen. Als een partij de bewijzen niet binnen de voorgeschreven tijd zou kunnen indienen, zou ze falen. Voor ODR, behalve arbitrage, is de termijn echter erg vaag. 74 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism - Structurering Right Protection and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Binnen en buiten de rechtbank 7-11. 75 "Vraag over de tijd die wordt gebruikt om het geschil door de consumentendienst van Taobao te behandelen" <http://wangdian.hznzcn.com/wenti/4519.html> geraadpleegd op 16 november 2016. 208 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE 4.1.3 Valt samen met de Kenmerken van e-commerce Volgens de vergelijking heeft het Taobao ODS-platform de kenmerken van hoge snelheid, eenvoudige procedure en lage kosten. Zijn populariteit heeft aangetoond dat efficiëntie en zuinigheid in B2C- en C2C-geschillen belangrijker zijn dan eerlijkheid, neutraliteit, professionaliteit en validiteit, die gewoon samenvallen met de kenmerken van e-commerce. 4.1.4 Sociale participatie om gezamenlijk een e-commerce-ecosysteem op te bouwen Door openbare beoordeling en rapportage aan Taobao heeft Taobao de sociale macht geïntroduceerd, inclusief de uitstekende koper en verkoper om gezamenlijk deel te nemen aan de constructie en het bestuur van het Ali e-commerce-ecosysteem. Er zijn elke dag zoveel transacties op Taobao, het is moeilijk te vermijden dat de consumentendienst soms niet bekend is met het fenomeen. Bovendien, aangezien het bewijsprincipe van Taobao is "het product en de beschrijving zijn op het eerste gezicht identiek", zou een openbare recensie 76 kunnen leiden tot een meer deskundige persoon om een zaak te beoordelen. Vanuit het rechtvaardigheidsaspect maakt het systeem gebruik van de methode van het willekeurig afleveren van de taak aan de interviewer77 en het challenge-systeem om effectief te voorkomen dat de recensent zaken selecteert voor zijn eigen belangen.78 Bovendien kunnen zowel de koper als de verkoper deelnemen aan de openbare beoordeling en rapport, dus het is een goede kans om de deelnemer markteducatie te geven om hen de oorzaken van de geschillen te laten weten en vervolgens om de geschillen te vermijden. Het meest opvallende punt is dat het systeem een manier is om sociaal coöperatief bestuur te realiseren.79 Natuurlijk zijn ook de beperkingen van het Taobao ODS-mechanisme duidelijk, zoals de regels zijn onzeker; de beslissing is niet juridisch bindend; de methoden voor het vaststellen van feiten zijn beperkt;80 de derde partij die helpt bij het oplossen van het geschil kan belangen hebben bij beide partijen; gebrek aan toezicht en regelgevend mechanisme; de billijkheid van de beslissing is twijfelachtig; 81 en de onredelijke immuniteit van verantwoordelijkheid van het platform zelf, 82 etc. Dat is precies de reden waarom andere kanalen zijn 76 Taobao Rules of Dispute Settlement, art 101. 77 Convention on Taobao Public Review (Trial Implementation), art 9. 78 Ibid art 5. 79 Shen Xinwang "Taobao Internet Dispute Settlement Mechanism - Structurering Right Protection and Its Judicial Value" (2016) 3 Binnen en buiten de rechtbank 7-11. 80 Zheng Jun "Over de ontwikkeling van ODR in China - Taobao-model voor geschillenbeslechting als voorbeeld nemen" (2014) 20 Rechtssysteem en samenleving 44-45. 81 Luo Xiulan (nr. 10) 57-65. 82 Zheng Jun (n 80) 44-45. OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 209 ook noodzakelijk. Omdat het een niet-onafhankelijke derde partij is, kan het interne ODS-mechanisme nooit andere externe systemen vervangen. In de context dat er in China nog steeds geen relevante formele e-commercewetten zijn, is het interne ODS-model ongetwijfeld de meest directe en efficiënte manier om problemen op te lossen. online geschillen. 4.2 Obstakels en uitdagingen van ODR-ontwikkeling in China Gezien de huidige ontwikkelingssituatie van ODS, vanwege de voordelen van zuinigheid, efficiëntie en flexibiliteit, in China, is het interne ODS-mechanisme van het e-commerceplatform het meest welkom; en de online rechtbank is ook opgewarmd met de pleitbezorger van "Internet + Judiciary" hervorming.83 Alleen ODR, is niet goed ontwikkeld, het heeft zelfs de achterlijke tendens. Het obstakel en de uitdaging voor ODR zijn ernstiger. 4.2.1 Ontoereikende wetgeving Wat betreft het interne e-commerceplatform, heeft elk zijn eigen regels voor geschillenbeslechting; en hoewel online rechtbanken ook geen specifieke regelgeving hebben, zijn er relevante proceswetten als referentie; maar in ODR, behalve de arbitrage-instelling, hebben andere geen specifieke regels. Daarom is het moeilijk om "in de schaduw van de wet" te onderhandelen of te bemiddelen. Voor de traditionele ADR zijn de partijen bij het geschil op de hoogte van de wettelijke regels die van toepassing zijn op het gebied van hun geschil. De uitkomst die de wet zal opleggen als er geen overeenstemming wordt bereikt, geeft elke partij een redelijk goed beeld van haar onderhandelingspositie.84 Cortes geeft aan dat "de totstandbrenging van een wettelijk kader op ODR-gebied voor B2C-geschillen de rechtszekerheid zal vergroten, waardoor de uitbreiding van kwaliteit en eerlijke ODR-methoden." 85 Partijen zullen het recht in overweging nemen bij het uitzetten van een strategie in de ADR-procedure.86 De wetgeving van ODR is echter verre van voldoende om dit soort onderhandelingen te voeren. Online arbitrage heeft enkele regels, maar is nog steeds onvolmaakt. In de offline handel 83 "Convergence and Extension: the Improvement Road of Judiciary Promulgation in Context of "Internet +'"<www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2015/12/id/1759991.shtml> geraadpleegd op 15 januari 2017. 84 Esther van den Heuvel "Online Dispute Resolution as A Solution to Cross-border E-Disputes - An Introduction To ODR", p16 <www.oecd.org/internet/consumer/1878940.pdf> geraadpleegd op 19 november 2016. 85 Pablo Cortes "Accredited Online Dispute Resolution Services: Creating European Legal Standards for Ensuring Fair and Effective Processes" (2008) 17(3) Wet op de informatie- en communicatietechnologie 221-237, 224. 86 R Cooter, S Marks en R Mnookin "Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: A Testable Model of Strategic Behavior" (1982) 11 The Journal of Legal Studies 225-251. 210 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE transactie, vanwege territoriale beperking, zelfs als er veel geschillen zijn, de bevoegdheidskwesties, van toepassing wet en de tenuitvoerlegging van de uitspraak zou niet van tien uitdagend zijn. Met de voortdurende ontwikkeling van e-commerce, kon de consument transacties doen met de handelaren in alle uithoeken van de wereld. Partijen in de internetomgeving, met name grensoverschrijdende transacties, zouden moeite hebben om de problemen van toepasselijk recht, jurisdictie en handhaving etc. op te lossen, wat niet is voorgeschreven in de relevante arbitragereglementen. 4.2.2 Beperkt aanvaardingsbereik In China zijn er maar weinig ODR-platforms, ongeacht de specifieke ODR-leverancier, of traditionele bemiddelings- of arbitrage-instellingen die ODR-diensten zouden kunnen leveren. Bovendien accepteerde het ODR-platform meestal alleen zaken met betrekking tot zijn aangesloten ondernemingen, waardoor de consumenten het platform niet konden gebruiken. Begin 2017 waren slechts 48 ondernemingen geregistreerd op het CCS-platform87 en 9 op het Pudong-platform.88 Wat arbitrage betreft, het levert alleen bindende arbitrage en niet-bindende arbitrage is illegaal in China. 4.2.3 Casual Quit-systeem Elke methode om de jurisdictie over de zaak te krijgen, heeft de toestemming van beide partijen nodig. Behalve bindende online arbitrage, zoals bij andere ODR-methoden, kan een partij die ODR niet wil gebruiken, zich op elk moment terugtrekken uit ODR zonder enige reden. Dit zou de klacht, die de acceptatievergoeding had ingediend, erg passief maken, maar zonder verhaal. 4.2.4 Onredelijke vergoedingen Volgens de berekeningsmethode van de arbitragevergoeding uit 2009 door CIETAC, heeft elke zaak minimaal RMB 4.000 nodig. De algemene online transacties zijn echter van lage waarde. De kosten van online arbitrage zijn zo hoog, dat ze niet op elkaar passen. In 2014 is het gewijzigd in minimaal RMB 100, wat erop lijkt dat de kosten veel zijn verlaagd. Volgens statistieken is de som van de klacht van 2015 in China echter respectievelijk: RMB 100 en lager, goed voor 17,49%; en RMB 100-500 37,57%. (Figuur 4) Het is duidelijk dat 17,49% van de geschillen waarbij RMB 100 en lager betrokken zijn, niet voor online arbitrage zou kiezen omdat de arbitragekosten hoger zijn dan de transactieprijs of -waarde. 37,57% van de geschillen waarbij RMB 100-500 betrokken is, kiest mogelijk ook niet eerst voor online arbitrage, omdat ze een effectieve oplossing kunnen krijgen via het interne mechanisme van e-commerce 87 <http://hjxt.cca.cn> geraadpleegd op 3 januari 2017. 88 <http://www.shodr.org/Article/List_72.aspx> geraadpleegd op 3 januari 2017.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 211
platform. That is to say, the online arbitration would not function on over 50% of
complaints.
Sources from: 2015 Report on E-commerce Consumer Experience and Complaint Supervision;
available at: [accessed on 15 January
2017].
On the contrary, other ODR methods are all free. For a platform, it needs funds
for maintenance. Without the continuous financial support, ODR is hard to maintain
its operation. Thus, a more reasonable, appropriate and detailed calculation of ODR
expense is required in any efforts to re-design the system.
Facing the above difficulties and challenges, based on China's national conditions
and the domestic and international experiences, it is better to re-design China ODS
mechanism, especially the ODR.
V ESTABLISH CHINESE ODR FOLLOWING UNCITRAL AND
ALIBABA
Various e-commerce enterprises, business organizations, governmental
institutions and international organization have actively advocated and promoted
ODR. ODR is regarded as the important aspect to guarantee e-commerce safety,
212 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
enhance the consumer's trust and confidence in e-commerce, and establish a good
environment to the development of e-commerce. 89 One of the important
contributions relating to ODR is from UNCITRAL. Since 2010, Working Group III
of UNCITRAL has started its work on ODR. After 6 years of analysis and
discussion, finally the TNODR has been adopted. TNODR is to establish guidance
in the field of ODR relating to cross-border electronic commerce transactions, which
includes low-value sales or service contracts (including B2C transactions)
concluded using electronic communications. TNODR has no binding and the
content is the consensus of its member countries. Besides, UNCITRAL has also
discussed questions about the validity of the arbitration agreement and the
implementation system. Being the member of the UN, China has also submitted its
opinions and suggestions, which would bring the new direction and requirement to
the construction of China ODR. In addition, the internal ODS mechanism of
e-commerce platform, such as Alibaba Group, has supplied many experiences and
innovations to be a good reference to ODR system. Combing the domestic and
foreign experiences, next, the paper attempts to outline some key points concerning
the establishment of China ODR system.
5.1 Settlement Procedure: Negotiation; Facilitated Settlement; Final
Stage
TNODR prescribed the process of an ODR proceeding may consist: negotiation;
facilitated settlement (mainly mediation);
90 and a third (final) stage. The ODR
proceeding may commence when a claimant submits a notice through the ODR
platform to the ODR administrator. The concrete commencing time is that ODR
administrator notifies the parties that the notice is available at the ODR platform.
The first stage of proceedings may commence following the communication of the
respondent's reply to the ODR platform. If the respondent didn't reply in a reasonable
time, or the parties haven't made an agreement through negotiation, or if any party
asked, the second stage namely the facilitated settlement could be initiated. At the
second stage, a neutral is appointed by the ODR administrator and communicates
with the parties to try to achieve a settlement. If the neutral has not succeeded in
facilitating the settlement, it is desirable that the ODR administrator or neutral
89 Ding Ying "Online Settlement of Online Consumer Dispute – Taking Taobao Platform as the
Example" (2014) 2 Wuhan University International Law Review 208-236, 211.
90 Mediation is viewed as a kind of ''facilitated negotiation''. See Susan M Leeson and Bryan M
Johnston Ending it: Dispute Resolution in America (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing, 1988) 133.
See also Patterson and Seabolt (n 44) 53.
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 213
informs the parties of the nature of the final stage, and of the form that it might
take.91
Each stage of TNODR is need not be exhausted in order to initiate the next stage,
ie, the party could launch mediation without negotiation, or directly access to the
final stage without mediation, reflecting the flexibility of ODR. Although ADR has
the same characteristic, it can't meet the high requirements of internet world when
internet has gradually penetrated into the legal relationships with its characteristics
such as global, non-centralized management and high autonomy. 92 Under ODR
model, the initiation of any procedure only needs press of some keys in a certain
internet environment. This space and time fragmentation model makes ODR more
flexible and convenient than ADR, and enhances the efficiency of dispute
settlement.
It's worthy to note that TNODR excludes the question of the nature of the final
stage of the ODR process (arbitration/non-arbitration), for there are many arguments
on it. The focus is whether the pre-dispute arbitration agreements are binding on
consumers: countries represented by USA considered it's binding; while countries
represented by EU considered non-binding. For different jurisdiction has different
opinion, Working Group III decided to adopt "two-track" rule to solve the problem:
93
Track I makes the ODR ending in a binding arbitration stage; Track II to the
contrary. Each country should notify to the Secretariat, which track it belongs to.
Once decided, the seller could judge which jurisdiction the consumer belongs based
on the delivery address, to tell which track should be applied to solve the dispute.
Because of diversified opinion concerning the validity of pre-dispute agreement, and
in fact, most cases could be successfully resolved in negotiation and mediation
stage,94 the final TNODR doesn't involve the online arbitration. However, what can
be predicted is that it's impossible to harmonize all countries' attitude on the
question, and two-track system is the best way at present.
91 TNODR, paras 18-21.
92 Xiao Yongping and Xie Xinsheng "ODR: New Model to Solve E-commerce Dispute" (2003) 6
China Legal Science 146-157, 146.
93 Online Dispute Resolution for Cross-Border Electronic Commerce Transactions: Draft Procedural
Rules, para 15.
94 Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) on the work of its twenty-second
session, para 30.
214 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE
As for Chinese regulation, either pre-dispute or post-dispute arbitration
agreement is valid,95 so China belongs to Track I. If the consumer is from China,
then the pre-dispute arbitration agreement is valid. When China establishes ODR
system, the track system of UNCITRAL will be a good reference to classify the
consumers in different jurisdiction in order to cope with the potential disputes from
around the world.
5.2 The Third Party Who Helps to Solve the Dispute
ODR can hardly operate without the third party. Here, the third party means all
participants in ODS except the opposing parties. On basis of TNODR and the
practice, the third parties should at least include "technology third party",
"administrator third party" and "neutral third party".
"Technology third party" refers to all electronic and information technology
support required in ODR, including hardware and software environment. Some
scholars have pointed out that code – the number combination of the regulations in
the cyberspace – is the law,96 which has totally transformed the regulation order in
cyberspace. Different with the physical space, the software and hardware make the
cyberspace what it is, also regulate cyberspace as it is.97 Ethan Katsh called it the
"fourth party".
98 However, technology support is the most important composition of
ODR, which "provides both disputants and third parties with unprecedented
procedures and capacities".
99 Technology is the necessary requirement of ODR,
which has created the possibility to fulfil ODR. Technology is already being widely
used as both an assistant and a full participant in the dispute resolution process, 100
95 Arbitration Law, art 16, "An arbitration agreement shall include arbitration clauses stipulated in
the contract and agreements of submission to arbitration that are concluded in other written forms
before or after disputes arise".
96 William J Mitchell City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT
Press, 1995)111; Joel Reidenberg "Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules
Through Technology" (1998) 76 Texas Law Review 553-593; Lawrence Lessig Code: Version 2.0
(Cambridge, Basic Books, 2006).
97 Lawrence Lessig (n 96) 5.
98 Ethan Katsh and Leah Wing "Ten Years of Online Dispute Resolution: Looking at the Past and
Constructing the Future" (2006) 38 University of Toledo Law Review 101-126, 112.
99 Marta Poblet "Introduction to Mobile Technologies, Conflict Management, and ODR: Exploring
Common Grounds" in Marta Poblet Mobile Technologies for Conflict Management (Netherlands,
Springer, 2011) 6.
100 Arno R Lodder and John Zeleznikow "Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute Resolution" in
Mohamed S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh and Daniel Rainey (eds) Online Dispute Resolution:
Theory and Practice, A Treatise On Technology And Dispute Resolution (The Netherlands, Eleven
International Publishing, 2012) 61
ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 211 platform. That is to say, the online arbitration would not function on over 50% of complaints. Sources from: 2015 Report on E-commerce Consumer Experience and Complaint Supervision; available at: <www.100ec.cn/zt/upload_data/2016315/images/2015bg.pdf> [accessed on 15 January 2017]. On the contrary, other ODR methods are all free. For a platform, it needs funds for maintenance. Without the continuous financial support, ODR is hard to maintain its operation. Thus, a more reasonable, appropriate and detailed calculation of ODR expense is required in any efforts to re-design the system. Facing the above difficulties and challenges, based on China's national conditions and the domestic and international experiences, it is better to re-design China ODS mechanism, especially the ODR. V ESTABLISH CHINESE ODR FOLLOWING UNCITRAL AND ALIBABA Various e-commerce enterprises, business organizations, governmental institutions and international organization have actively advocated and promoted ODR. ODR is regarded as the important aspect to guarantee e-commerce safety, 212 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE enhance the consumer's trust and confidence in e-commerce, and establish a good environment to the development of e-commerce. 89 One of the important contributions relating to ODR is from UNCITRAL. Since 2010, Working Group III of UNCITRAL has started its work on ODR. After 6 years of analysis and discussion, finally the TNODR has been adopted. TNODR is to establish guidance in the field of ODR relating to cross-border electronic commerce transactions, which includes low-value sales or service contracts (including B2C transactions) concluded using electronic communications. TNODR has no binding and the content is the consensus of its member countries. Besides, UNCITRAL has also discussed questions about the validity of the arbitration agreement and the implementation system. Being the member of the UN, China has also submitted its opinions and suggestions, which would bring the new direction and requirement to the construction of China ODR. In addition, the internal ODS mechanism of e-commerce platform, such as Alibaba Group, has supplied many experiences and innovations to be a good reference to ODR system. Combing the domestic and foreign experiences, next, the paper attempts to outline some key points concerning the establishment of China ODR system. 5.1 Settlement Procedure: Negotiation; Facilitated Settlement; Final Stage TNODR prescribed the process of an ODR proceeding may consist: negotiation; facilitated settlement (mainly mediation); 90 and a third (final) stage. The ODR proceeding may commence when a claimant submits a notice through the ODR platform to the ODR administrator. The concrete commencing time is that ODR administrator notifies the parties that the notice is available at the ODR platform. The first stage of proceedings may commence following the communication of the respondent's reply to the ODR platform. If the respondent didn't reply in a reasonable time, or the parties haven't made an agreement through negotiation, or if any party asked, the second stage namely the facilitated settlement could be initiated. At the second stage, a neutral is appointed by the ODR administrator and communicates with the parties to try to achieve a settlement. If the neutral has not succeeded in facilitating the settlement, it is desirable that the ODR administrator or neutral 89 Ding Ying "Online Settlement of Online Consumer Dispute – Taking Taobao Platform as the Example" (2014) 2 Wuhan University International Law Review 208-236, 211. 90 Mediation is viewed as a kind of ''facilitated negotiation''. See Susan M Leeson and Bryan M Johnston Ending it: Dispute Resolution in America (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing, 1988) 133. See also Patterson and Seabolt (n 44) 53. ON CHINA CROSS-BORDER ONLINE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 213 informs the parties of the nature of the final stage, and of the form that it might take.91 Each stage of TNODR is need not be exhausted in order to initiate the next stage, ie, the party could launch mediation without negotiation, or directly access to the final stage without mediation, reflecting the flexibility of ODR. Although ADR has the same characteristic, it can't meet the high requirements of internet world when internet has gradually penetrated into the legal relationships with its characteristics such as global, non-centralized management and high autonomy. 92 Under ODR model, the initiation of any procedure only needs press of some keys in a certain internet environment. This space and time fragmentation model makes ODR more flexible and convenient than ADR, and enhances the efficiency of dispute settlement. It's worthy to note that TNODR excludes the question of the nature of the final stage of the ODR process (arbitration/non-arbitration), for there are many arguments on it. The focus is whether the pre-dispute arbitration agreements are binding on consumers: countries represented by USA considered it's binding; while countries represented by EU considered non-binding. For different jurisdiction has different opinion, Working Group III decided to adopt "two-track" rule to solve the problem: 93 Track I makes the ODR ending in a binding arbitration stage; Track II to the contrary. Each country should notify to the Secretariat, which track it belongs to. Once decided, the seller could judge which jurisdiction the consumer belongs based on the delivery address, to tell which track should be applied to solve the dispute. Because of diversified opinion concerning the validity of pre-dispute agreement, and in fact, most cases could be successfully resolved in negotiation and mediation stage,94 the final TNODR doesn't involve the online arbitration. However, what can be predicted is that it's impossible to harmonize all countries' attitude on the question, and two-track system is the best way at present. 91 TNODR, paras 18-21. 92 Xiao Yongping and Xie Xinsheng "ODR: New Model to Solve E-commerce Dispute" (2003) 6 China Legal Science 146-157, 146. 93 Online Dispute Resolution for Cross-Border Electronic Commerce Transactions: Draft Procedural Rules, para 15. 94 Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) on the work of its twenty-second session, para 30. 214 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENCE As for Chinese regulation, either pre-dispute or post-dispute arbitration agreement is valid,95 so China belongs to Track I. If the consumer is from China, then the pre-dispute arbitration agreement is valid. When China establishes ODR system, the track system of UNCITRAL will be a good reference to classify the consumers in different jurisdiction in order to cope with the potential disputes from around the world. 5.2 The Third Party Who Helps to Solve the Dispute ODR can hardly operate without the third party. Here, the third party means all participants in ODS except the opposing parties. On basis of TNODR and the practice, the third parties should at least include "technology third party", "administrator third party" and "neutral third party". "Technology third party" refers to all electronic and information technology support required in ODR, including hardware and software environment. Some scholars have pointed out that code – the number combination of the regulations in the cyberspace – is the law,96 which has totally transformed the regulation order in cyberspace. Different with the physical space, the software and hardware make the cyberspace what it is, also regulate cyberspace as it is.97 Ethan Katsh called it the "fourth party". 98 However, technology support is the most important composition of ODR, which "provides both disputants and third parties with unprecedented procedures and capacities". 99 Technology is the necessary requirement of ODR, which has created the possibility to fulfil ODR. Technology is already being widely used as both an assistant and a full participant in the dispute resolution process, 100 95 Arbitration Law, art 16, "An arbitration agreement shall include arbitration clauses stipulated in the contract and agreements of submission to arbitration that are concluded in other written forms before or after disputes arise". 96 William J Mitchell City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1995)111; Joel Reidenberg "Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules Through Technology" (1998) 76 Texas Law Review 553-593; Lawrence Lessig Code: Version 2.0 (Cambridge, Basic Books, 2006). 97 Lawrence Lessig (n 96) 5. 98 Ethan Katsh and Leah Wing "Ten Years of Online Dispute Resolution: Looking at the Past and Constructing the Future" (2006) 38 University of Toledo Law Review 101-126, 112. 99 Marta Poblet "Introduction to Mobile Technologies, Conflict Management, and ODR: Exploring Common Grounds" in Marta Poblet Mobile Technologies for Conflict Management (Netherlands, Springer, 2011) 6. 100 Arno R Lodder and John Zeleznikow "Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute Resolution" in Mohamed S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh and Daniel Rainey (eds) Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice, A Treatise On Technology And Dispute Resolution (The Netherlands, Eleven International Publishing, 2012) 61
NEDERLANDS
OP CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 211 platform. Dat wil zeggen dat de online arbitrage bij meer dan 50% van de klachten niet zou werken. Bronnen uit: Rapport 2015 E-commerce Consumentenervaring en Klachtenbegeleiding; beschikbaar op: <www.100ec.cn/zt/upload_data/2016315/images/2015bg.pdf> [geraadpleegd op 15 januari 2017]. Integendeel, andere ODR-methoden zijn allemaal gratis. Voor een platform heeft het geld nodig voor onderhoud. Zonder de voortdurende financiĂ«le steun is het moeilijk om ODR te laten functioneren. Daarom is een meer redelijke, geschikte en gedetailleerde berekening van de ODR-kosten vereist bij alle pogingen om het systeem opnieuw te ontwerpen. Geconfronteerd met de bovenstaande moeilijkheden en uitdagingen, gebaseerd op de nationale omstandigheden van China en de binnenlandse en internationale ervaringen, is het beter om het China ODS-mechanisme opnieuw te ontwerpen, met name de ODR. V ESTIG CHINESE ODR NA UNCITRAL EN ALIBABA Verschillende e-commercebedrijven, bedrijfsorganisaties, overheidsinstellingen en internationale organisaties hebben ODR actief gepleit en gepromoot. ODR wordt beschouwd als het belangrijkste aspect om de veiligheid van e-commerce te garanderen, het vertrouwen van de consument in e-commerce te vergroten en een goed klimaat te scheppen voor de ontwikkeling van e-commerce. 89 Een van de belangrijke bijdragen met betrekking tot ODR is afkomstig van UNCITRAL. Werkgroep III van UNCITRAL is sinds 2010 begonnen met haar werkzaamheden op het gebied van ODR. Na 6 jaar analyse en discussie is eindelijk de TNODR aangenomen. TNODR moet richtlijnen opstellen op het gebied van ODR met betrekking tot grensoverschrijdende elektronische handelstransacties, waaronder verkoop- of servicecontracten met een lage waarde (inclusief B2C-transacties) die worden gesloten met behulp van elektronische communicatie. TNODR is niet bindend en de inhoud is de consensus van de aangesloten landen. Daarnaast heeft UNCITRAL ook vragen besproken over de geldigheid van de arbitrageovereenkomst en het uitvoeringssysteem. Als lid van de VN heeft China ook zijn meningen en suggesties ingediend, die de nieuwe richting en eis zouden brengen voor de opbouw van China ODR. Bovendien heeft het interne ODS-mechanisme van het e-commerceplatform, zoals Alibaba Group, veel ervaringen en innovaties opgeleverd om een goede referentie te zijn naar het ODR-systeem. Door de binnenlandse en buitenlandse ervaringen te combineren, probeert het document vervolgens enkele belangrijke punten te schetsen met betrekking tot de oprichting van het Chinese ODR-systeem. 5.1 Schikkingsprocedure: Onderhandeling; gefaciliteerde afwikkeling; Laatste fase TNODR heeft voorgeschreven dat het proces van een ODR-procedure kan bestaan uit: onderhandeling; gefaciliteerde afwikkeling (voornamelijk mediation); 90 en een derde (laatste) etappe. De ODR-procedure kan beginnen wanneer een eiser via het ODR-platform een kennisgeving indient bij de ODR-beheerder. Het concrete aanvangstijdstip is dat de ODR-beheerder de partijen meldt dat de melding beschikbaar is op het ODR-platform. De eerste fase van de procedure kan beginnen na de mededeling van het antwoord van de verweerder aan het ODR-platform. Als de respondent niet binnen een redelijke termijn heeft geantwoord, of de partijen geen overeenstemming hebben bereikt door middel van onderhandelingen, of als een partij erom vraagt, kan de tweede fase, namelijk de gefaciliteerde schikking, worden gestart. In de tweede fase wordt door de ODR-beheerder een neutrale aangesteld die met de partijen communiceert om tot een schikking te komen. Als de neutrale er niet in is geslaagd de schikking te vergemakkelijken, is het wenselijk dat de ODR-beheerder of de neutrale 89 Ding Ying "Online Settlement of Online Consumer Dispute - Taking Taobao Platform as the example" (2014) 2 Wuhan University International Law Review 208-236 , 211. 90 Mediation wordt gezien als een soort ''gefaciliteerde onderhandeling''. Zie Susan M Leeson en Bryan M Johnston Ending it: Dispute Resolution in America (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing, 1988) 133. Zie ook Patterson en Seabolt (n 44) 53. ON CHINA GRENSOVERSCHRIJDENDE ONLINE GESCHILLENBESLECHTING 213 informeert de partijen van de aard van de laatste fase en van de vorm die deze kan aannemen.91 Elke fase van TNODR hoeft niet te zijn uitgeput om de volgende fase te starten, dat wil zeggen dat de partij mediation kan starten zonder onderhandeling, of directe toegang tot de laatste fase zonder bemiddeling, wat de flexibiliteit van ODR weerspiegelt. Hoewel ADR hetzelfde kenmerk heeft, kan het niet voldoen aan de hoge eisen van de internetwereld wanneer internet geleidelijk is doorgedrongen in de rechtsverhoudingen met zijn kenmerken als globaal, niet-gecentraliseerd beheer en hoge autonomie. 92 In het ODR-model hoeft voor het starten van een procedure slechts op enkele toetsen in een bepaalde internetomgeving te worden gedrukt. Dit ruimte- en tijdfragmentatiemodel maakt ODR flexibeler en handiger dan ADR, en verbetert de efficiĂ«ntie van geschillenbeslechting. Het is vermeldenswaard dat TNODR de vraag naar de aard van de laatste fase van het ODR-proces (arbitrage/non-arbitrage) uitsluit, want er zijn veel argumenten over. De focus is of de pre-dispute arbitrageovereenkomsten bindend zijn voor consumenten: landen vertegenwoordigd door de VS beschouwden het als bindend; terwijl landen die door de EU worden vertegenwoordigd, als niet-bindend worden beschouwd. Omdat verschillende jurisdicties een verschillende mening hebben, heeft Werkgroep III besloten om de "tweesporenregel" aan te nemen om het probleem op te lossen: 93 Spoor I zorgt ervoor dat de ODR eindigt in een bindende arbitragefase; Spoor II daarentegen. Elk land moet aan het secretariaat doorgeven tot welk spoor het behoort. Eenmaal besloten, kan de verkoper beoordelen tot welk rechtsgebied de consument behoort op basis van het afleveradres, om te bepalen welk spoor moet worden toegepast om het geschil op te lossen. Vanwege de gediversifieerde mening over de geldigheid van de overeenkomst vóór het geschil, en in feite, zouden de meeste gevallen met succes kunnen worden opgelost in de onderhandelings- en bemiddelingsfase,94 omvat de uiteindelijke TNODR geen online arbitrage. Wat echter kan worden voorspeld, is dat het onmogelijk is om de houding van alle landen over de kwestie te harmoniseren, en een tweesporensysteem is momenteel de beste manier. 91 TNODR, punten 18-21. 92 Xiao Yongping en Xie Xinsheng "ODR: New Model to Solve E-commerce Dispute" (2003) 6 China Legal Science 146-157, 146. 93 Online geschillenbeslechting voor grensoverschrijdende elektronische handelstransacties: ontwerpprocedureregels, paragraaf 15. 94 Verslag van Werkgroep III (Online Geschillenbeslechting) over het werk van zijn tweeĂ«ntwintigste zitting, paragraaf 30. 214 UNCITRAL EMERGENCE CONFERENTIE Wat betreft Chinese regelgeving is een arbitrageovereenkomst vóór of na een geschil geldig,95 dus China behoort naar Track I. Komt de consument uit China, dan is de pre-dispute arbitrageovereenkomst geldig. Wanneer China een ODR-systeem invoert, zal het track-systeem van UNCITRAL een goede referentie zijn om de consumenten in verschillende jurisdicties te classificeren om mogelijke geschillen van over de hele wereld het hoofd te bieden. 5.2 De derde partij die het geschil helpt oplossen ODR kan nauwelijks functioneren zonder de derde partij. De derde partij betekent hier alle deelnemers aan ODS behalve de tegenpartijen. Op basis van TNODR en de praktijk behoren tot de derde partijen in ieder geval "technologie derde partij", "beheerder derde partij" en "neutrale derde partij" te zijn. "Technology third party" verwijst naar alle elektronische en informatietechnologie-ondersteuning die vereist is in ODR, inclusief hardware- en softwareomgeving. Sommige wetenschappers hebben erop gewezen dat code – de cijfercombinatie van de regelgeving in de cyberspace – de wet is96 die de orde van regelgeving in cyberspace totaal heeft veranderd. Anders dan de fysieke ruimte, maken de software en hardware de cyberruimte tot wat ze is, ze reguleren ook de cyberruimte zoals ze is.97 Ethan Katsh noemde het de 'vierde partij'. 98 Technologische ondersteuning is echter de belangrijkste samenstelling van ODR, die "zowel disputanten als derden voorziet van ongekende procedures en capaciteiten". 99 Technologie is de noodzakelijke vereiste van ODR, wat de mogelijkheid heeft gecreĂ«erd om aan ODR te voldoen. Technologie wordt al op grote schaal gebruikt als zowel een assistent als een volledige deelnemer aan het geschillenbeslechtingsproces, 100 95 Arbitragewet, art 16, "Een arbitrageovereenkomst zal arbitrageclausules bevatten die zijn vastgelegd in het contract en overeenkomsten van onderwerping aan arbitrage die worden gesloten in andere schriftelijke vormen voor of na het ontstaan van geschillen". 96 William J Mitchell City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1995)111; Joel Reidenberg "Lex Informatica: de formulering van informatiebeleidsregels door middel van technologie" (1998) 76 Texas Law Review 553-593; Lawrence Lessig-code: versie 2.0 (Cambridge, Basic Books, 2006). 97 Lawrence Lessig (n 96) 5. 98 Ethan Katsh en Leah Wing "Tien jaar online geschillenbeslechting: kijken naar het verleden en bouwen aan de toekomst" (2006) 38 University of Toledo Law Review 101-126, 112. 99 Marta Poblet "Inleiding tot mobiele technologieĂ«n, conflictbeheersing en ODR: gemeenschappelijke gronden verkennen" in Marta Poblet Mobiele technologieĂ«n voor conflictbeheersing (Nederland, Springer, 2011) 6. 100 Arno R Lodder en John Zeleznikow "Kunstmatige intelligentie en onlinegeschillenbeslechting" in Mohamed S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh en Daniel Rainey (eds) Online geschillenbeslechting: theorie en praktijk, een verhandeling over technologie en geschillenbeslechting (Nederland, Eleven International Publishing, 2012) 61
Comments
Post a Comment