Potential Role of Technology to Resolve Low-Value Civil Claims

Online dispute resolution (ODR) is an effective tool used in practice in court. It is used in the cases of low-value civil claims that do not require much attention or caution from the side of the jury. This technology is already present in the courts, which facilitates the judicial system’s work, allows people to save time, and optimizes the court’s work significantly. The critical detail is that online dispute resolution still requires the presence of a person who is a specialist in judicial cases. By incorporating blockchain technology and the associated digital tools into the legal framework, experts will be able to address concerns associated with data management, thus, addressing legal issues with greater precision and ensuring that justice prevails in the legal environment.

It is possible to hypothesize that the development of artificial intelligence technologies might improve the quality of the court’s services. There is a chance that artificial intelligence that can solve low-value civil claims will be the first step in making the judicial system more optimized and objective¹². Artificial intelligence is an unbiased advantage of this technology compared to humans. It is expected that technologies will make the decisions on low-value civil cases automatic in the future, reducing the workload of human specialists³. Moreover, artificial intelligence will help the jury find objective findings on more complicated issues that seem biased⁴. In other words, the use of technological tools in the court is the opportunity to optimize people’s work, automate actions that do not require much attention from specialists, and make the judicial system more objective.

The definition of “artificial intelligence” is the general term that denotes various methods this technology features. Most people agree that this notion signifies the mechanisms that allow automated systems to work, including the choice of the appropriate language of programming or machine learning⁵⁶⁷. Artificial intelligence was used in the legal sphere for many years, but it was not as convenient as it is nowadays⁸⁹. In the future, the use of this technology can be expanded through the development of deep learning.

Low-value civil cases distinguish between relationship and commercial (or transactional) disputes. The main difference between these notions is the emotional component that is stronger in relationship disputes between people who are acquainted with each other or have close relationships, including friendship, intimate partnership, or family ties. Commercial cases focus on financial loss, and people are rarely disturbed by little emotions, making the decisions in these situations more objective. This distinction between the low-value civil cases shows that the resolutions of these situations often require different skills from the lawyer, and it is often problematic to remain objective¹⁰. However, one of the limitations when using artificial intelligence can be inefficiency under morally questionable circumstances of the case.

Among the best-known and the most discussed technologies currently promoted in the global market as a major possibility for improving companies’ financial and corporate performance, blockchain must be mentioned. The specified tool allows unifying core transactions and making them both more secure and more transparent¹¹. Therefore, its adoption must be seen as a crucial improvement of the existing online entrepreneurship setting. Specifically, the adoption of blockchain technologies will allow lawyers to benefit substantially due to the opportunities for connectivity and improved management of data. Blockchain technologies are the “mechanism to store information of the transaction in a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network” and a “distributed and open-source project that was designed to create a digital currency known as Bitcoin”¹². Therefore, blockchain can be interpreted as the technology that allows containing information and arranging it in a structural and hierarchal way. At the same time, blockchain technology requires more advanced data storage and analysis systems, as well as its protection, which may present a limitation.

Blockchain technology provides a range of opportunities for the legal system and the management of information within it. Specifically, for lawyers, blockchain technologies offer a chance to streamline a range of legal processes. For instance, the incorporation of blockchain and the related tools into the legal framework is expected to lead to a significant rise in the efficacy of managing contracts and the associated issues¹³. Namely, blockchain technology has created an opportunity for the use of digital contracts as the means of signing a legal agreement¹⁴. While being a departure from the traditional offline setting, the transfer of contract signing into the digital context suggests simplifying every stage of the process for all parties involved. Specifically, the processing time needed for the enforcement of the contract is reduced significantly with the introduction of the blockchain mechanism, whereas the range of financial services, including the support of consumers, is expanded extensively¹⁵. As a result, the support system for consumer sis sufficiently improved with the introduction of blockchain tools into the target setting.

ODR evolves with time, becoming more complicated and connected with the public sector of social life. As a result, new questions arise concerning solving consumer disputes and small claims. For instance, there is the concern connected with the economic side of resolving low-value disputes. The researchers have a biased opinion concerning the opportunities for the evolution of accessible civil justice practice. It is vital to develop a cautious attitude to preserve the fundamental ideals of civil justice, including accountability, legal validity, transparency, and equal access to it¹⁶¹⁷. ODR indeed shows significant potential and proposes equal and easy access to the judicial system, which foregrounds the necessity of its development.

Similarly, the blockchain technology is expected to develop quickly and lead to an array of innovative solutions in the legal context. Specifically, the inclusion of blockchain tools into the legal environment will suggest that the process of automation is launched and implemented successfully, therefore, crating premises for faster data management and a subsequent chance to address customers’ concerns promptly. The opportunity to provide a timely response to clients is guaranteed by the integration of all available databases into a single system and arranging it I the way that allows for the fastest access to and management of information.

Most importantly, the incorporation of blockchain technologies into the legal system can be seen as a means of minimizing external threats, to people’s well-being, particularly, the problem of terrorism as a major danger to citizens and their safety. Studies show that the data management that blockchain provides leads to the rapid enhancement of state security systems and excellent opportunities for monitoring the target environment for internal weaknesses and external threats¹⁸. Consequently, the incorporation of blockchain into the legal framework will lead to a massive rise in the levels of security and safety for every citizen. Namely, the chance to reinforce the extent of security and the level of protection against terrorist and the associated threats should be regarded as a vital aspect of blockchain’s advantage as a part of the legal framework. Consequently, Blockchain should be interpreted as an essential tool for legal experts to utilize in the context of the present-day complex sociopolitical setting.

Likewise, blockchain offers extensive advantages in managing economic transactions from a legal perspective. Due to the emphasis on rational use and storage of data, blockchain technologies provide a range of shortcuts for addressing legal concerns associated with trade. Ranging from the aforementioned opportunities for digital contracts as a simplified version of offline agreements to more nuanced issues linked to ensuring that no instances of fraud could take place in the target setting. Indeed, the increased transparency of the blockchain framework allows ensuring that the core processes within it remain open for observation to all participants involved, and that the records of the transactions in question are stored securely in the digital database¹⁹. Consequently, the integration of blockchain into the legal context helps simplify a range of economic transactions, specifically, the legal aspects thereof, thus, minimizing the range of issues that may possibly arise and making the management of legal aspects of the key activities significantly easier for all those concerned. Another undeniable advantage of the blockchain technology from a legal perspective concerns the opportunity to refrain from compromising the legal authority of those involved²⁰. While remaining completely open and transparent, the framework of the blockchain suggests that the core processes within it help minimize the risks of compromising any party involved due to the complex mechanism of data encryption and the associated characteristics.

Most importantly, one must keep in mind that the introduction of blockchain technology into the legal context will entail a drastic change in the extent of automation within the industry. Although the legal setting has already been introduced to several crucial technological advantages, a substantial part of processes remains completed in the offline context, which leads to the creation of multiple opportunities for errors²¹. Specifically, due to the complexity of offline data management and the presence of the human factor as a major threat to maintaining the records secure and consistent, the specified process often involves an increased threat of an error that may eventually lead to significant complications and legal repercussions²². In turn, the blockchain technology allows securing one from the specified risk, therefore, making the act of managing legal information a locating the necessary data easy and error-free. Consequently, the legal environment and its participants, including both legal experts and their clients, will benefit substantially from the inclusion of the specified technology into the target context.

Scholars expect that technologies with artificial intelligence will revolutionize the legal sphere. The primary issue is that these technologies will make legal justice more accessible for people, which is a significant problem now²³. According to the investigation, more than 5 billion people worldwide do not have access to legal justice, leading to severe societal inequality²⁴. Moreover, approximately 253 million individuals live where their civil rights are violated brutally, including anarchy in the country, military conflict, and slavery²⁵. In other words, many people are excluded from the legal system, which means they are deprived of political, social, and economic security²⁶²⁷. Making access to legal justice equal for all people is one of the goals of the United Nations²⁸. Therefore, implementing artificial intelligence technologies that focus on legal services is the opportunity for millions of people to escape from injustice and solve their problems using the law.

At the same time, some experts express concerns about the introduction of new technologies in courts. Such scholars as Biard and others argue that there is a possibility of privatization of justice, which is to eliminate lawers from the process, as well as problems with the creation of appropriate procedures for regulation. The main problem in this regard is the elimination of more participants, which turns such a process into “justice behind closed doors”²⁹. Thus, scholars are concerned about the transparency of justice in the implementation of new technologies, which the blockchain can presumably cope with³⁰³¹. However, in light of the widespread introduction of the legal system, new rules and regulations need to be developed that would cover the field of information security and confidentiality.

Another important problem that scholars talk about is the cost-effectiveness of measures to introduce new technologies in the justice process, especially in relation to law-value civil claims. Engstrom and Gelbach underline that any litigaion system has two fundamental aspects “distribution of litigation costs and the distribution of information”³². In this regard, sholars express concern that new technological tools can not only significantly increase the cost of storing and analyzing data, but create information asymmetry between judges and litigants, and between litigants and litigants³³³⁴³⁵. Thus, in addition to the need for new measures to protect information, systems need to be regulated to protect the rights of litigants to access it³⁶. This aspect supports the concerns of Biard and others regarding the privatization of justice, as it gives exclusive access to information to a certain circle of people and limits the rest³⁷³⁸. In this regard, Sholars propose to pay special attention to the priority of developing appropriate procedures for the introduction and use of new technologies in the justice system.

Bibliography

Agrawal Ajay and others, ‘Artificial Intelligence: The Ambiguous Labor Market Impact of Automating Prediction’ (2019) 33(2) JEP 31.

Agustin Farida and others, ‘Utilization of Blockchain Technology for Management E-Certificate Open Journal System’ (2020) 4(2) ATM 133.

Aisha M Al-asmari Aisha M and others, ‘A Review of Concepts, Advantages and Pitfalls of Healthcare Applications in Blockchain Technology’ (2021) 21(5) International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security 199.

Alexandre Biard and others, ‘Introduction: The Future of Access to Justice—Beyond Science Fiction’ in Xandra Kramer and others (eds) New Pathways to Civil Justice in Europe Challenges of Access to Justice (Springer 2021).

Ashley Deeks, ‘The Judical Demand for Explainable Artificial Intelligence’ (2019) 119(7) Columbia Law Review 1829.

Camino Kavanagh, ‘Artificial Intelligence’ New Tech, New Threats, and New Governance Challenges: An Opportunity to Craft Smarter Responses?‘ Web.

Daniel Fiott and Gustav Lindstrom, ‘Artificial Intelligence: What Implications for EU Security and Defence?’ [2018] EUISS 1.

Darrell M. West, The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation (Brookings Institution Press 2018).

David Freeman Engstrom and Jonah B. Gelbach, ‘Legal Tech, Civil Procedure, and the Future of Adversarialism’ (2021) 169 SLS 1001.

Emre Bayamlioğlu and others, Being Profiled: Cogitas Ergo Sum. 10 Years of ‘Profiling the European Citizen’ (Amsterdam University Press, 2018).

Gary Marchant and Josh Covey, ‘Robo-Lawyers: Your New Best Friend or Your Worst Nightmare?’ (2018) 45(1) Litigation 27.

Joan Costa-Font and Mario Macis, Social Economics: Current and Emerging Avenues (The MIT Press 2017).

Kiel Brennan-Marquez and Stephen Henderson, ‘Artificial Intelligence and Role-Reversible Judgment’ (2019) 109(2) JCLC 137.

Liran Antebi, Artificial Intelligence and National Security in Israel (Institute for National Security Studies 2021).

Marc Lauritsen, ‘Law Practice Management: Marketing Real Lawyers in te Age of Artificial Intelligence’ (2017) 34(4) GPSolo 68.

Maria Lucia Passador, ‘Challenging Arbitration: How Can Its History Inform Its Current (E-) Practice?’ (2017) 24(2) Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution 233.

Maria Stefania Cataleta, Humane Artificial Intelligence: The Fragility of Human Rights Facing AI (East-West Center 2020).

Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, ‘A Common Law for the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Incremental Adjudication, Institutions, and Relational Non-Arbitrariness’ (2019) 119(7) Columbia Law Review 1773.

Mary Anne Franks, ‘Justice Beyond Dispute’ (2018) 131(5) HLR 1374.

Mercedes Bunz and Laima Janciute, Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things: UK Policy Opportunities and Challenges (University of Westminster Press 2018).

Mireille Hildebrandt, ‘Law As Computation in the Era of Artificial Legal Intelligence. Speaking Law to the Power of Statistics’ (2018) 68 The University of Toronto Law Journal 12.

Nicolas Economou and Bruce Hedin, ‘Legal Systems at a Crossroads: Justice in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’ in Al Naqvi and J. Mark Munoz (eds), Handbook of Artificial Intelligence and Robotic Process Automation: Policy and Government Applications (Anthem Press 2020) 119.

Reginald O’Shields, ‘Smart Contracts: Legal Agreements for the Blockchain’ (2017) 21(1) North Carolina Banking Institute 177.

Paul Scharre, ‘Highlighting Artificial Intelligence: An Interview with Paul Scharre Director, Technology and National Security Program Center for a New American Security Conducted 26 September 2017’ (2017) 11(4) Strategic Studies Quarterly 15.

Rong Wang, ‘Research on Development Method of Application System Based on Blockchain.” (2019) 3(1) International Journal of New Developments in Engineering and Society 1.

Rossi Francesca, ‘Building Trust in Artificial Intelligence’ (2018) 72(1) JIA 127.

Sally Power, Civil Society through the Lifecourse (Bristol University Press 2020).

Samuel Schoonmaker, ‘Withstanding Disruptive Innovation: How Attorneys Will Adapt and Survive Impending Challenges from Automation and Nontraditional Legal Services Providers’ (2017) 51(2) Family Law Quaterly 133.

Siddharth Peter de Souza and Maximilian Spohr, Technology, Innovation and Access to Justice: Dialogues on the Future of Law (Edinburgh University Press 2021).

Steven P. Croley, Civil Justice Reconsidered: Toward a Less Costly, More Accessible Litigation System (NYU Press 2017).

Vivi Tan, ‘Online Dispute Resolution for Small Civil Claims in Victoria: A New Paradigm in Civil Justice’ (2019) 24(1) Deakin Law Review 101.

Footnotes

• 1 Mercedes Bunz and Laima Janciute, Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things: UK Policy Opportunities and Challenges (University of Westminster Press 2018).
• 2 Paul Scharre, ‘Highlighting Artificial Intelligence: An Interview with Paul Scharre Director, Technology and National Security Program Center for a New American Security Conducted 26 September 2017’ (2017) 11(4) Strategic Studies Quarterly 15.
• 3 Mireille Hildebrandt, ‘Law As Computation in the Era of Artificial Legal Intelligence. Speaking Law to the Power of Statistics’ (2018) 68 The University of Toronto Law Journal 12.
• 4 Nicolas Economou and Bruce Hedin, ‘Legal Systems at a Crossroads: Justice in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’ in Al Naqvi and J. Mark Munoz (eds), Handbook of Artificial Intelligence and Robotic Process Automation: Policy and Government Applications (Anthem Press 2020) 119.
• 5 Agrawal Ajay and others, ‘Artificial Intelligence: The Ambiguous Labor Market Impact of Automating Prediction’ (2019) 33(2) JEP 31.
• 6 Liran Antebi, Artificial Intelligence and National Security in Israel (Institute for National Security Studies 2021).
• 7 Rossi Francesca, ‘Building Trust in Artificial Intelligence’ (2018) 72(1) JIA 127. Sally Power, Civil Society through the Lifecourse (Bristol University Press 2020).
• 8 Ashley Deeks, ‘The Judical Demand for Explainable Artificial Intelligence’ (2019) 119(7) Columbia Law Review 1829.
• 9 Kiel Brennan-Marquez and Stephen Henderson, ‘Artificial Intelligence and Role-Reversible Judgment’ (2019) 109(2) JCLC 137.
• 10 Mary Anne Franks, ‘Justice Beyond Dispute’ (2018) 131(5) HLR 1374.
• 11 Agustin Farida and others, ‘Utilization of Blockchain Technology for Management E-Certificate Open Journal System’ (2020) 4(2) ATM 133.
• 12 Aisha M Al-asmari Aisha M and others, ‘A Review of Concepts, Advantages and Pitfalls of Healthcare Applications in Blockchain Technology’ (2021) 21(5) International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security 199, 199.
• 13 Rong Wang, ‘Research on Development Method of Application System Based on Blockchain.” (2019) 3(1) International Journal of New Developments in Engineering and Society 1.
• 14 Reginald O’Shields, ‘Smart Contracts: Legal Agreements for the Blockchain’ (2017) 21(1) North Carolina Banking Institute 177.
• 15 Rong Wang, ‘Research on Development Method of Application System Based on Blockchain.” (2019) 3(1) International Journal of New Developments in Engineering and Society 1.
• 16 Vivi Tan, ‘Online Dispute Resolution for Small Civil Claims in Victoria: A New Paradigm in Civil Justice’ (2019) 24(1) Deakin Law Review 101.
• 17 Samuel Schoonmaker, ‘Withstanding Disruptive Innovation: How Attorneys Will Adapt and Survive Impending Challenges from Automation and Nontraditional Legal Services Providers’ (2017) 51(2) Family Law Quaterly 133.
• 18 Rong Wang, ‘Research on Development Method of Application System Based on Blockchain.” (2019) 3(1) International Journal of New Developments in Engineering and Society 1.
• 19 Reginald O’Shields, ‘Smart Contracts: Legal Agreements for the Blockchain’ (2017) 21(1) North Carolina Banking Institute 177.
• 20 Steven P. Croley, Civil Justice Reconsidered: Toward a Less Costly, More Accessible Litigation System (NYU Press 2017).
• 21 Rong Wang, ‘Research on Development Method of Application System Based on Blockchain.” (2019) 3(1) International Journal of New Developments in Engineering and Society 1.
• 22 Reginald O’Shields, ‘Smart Contracts: Legal Agreements for the Blockchain’ (2017) 21(1) North Carolina Banking Institute 177.
• 23 Daniel Fiott and Gustav Lindstrom, ‘Artificial Intelligence: What Implications for EU Security and Defence?’ [2018] EUISS 1.
• 24 Siddharth Peter de Souza and Maximilian Spohr, Technology, Innovation and Access to Justice: Dialogues on the Future of Law (Edinburgh University Press 2021), 12.
• 25 Ibid, 12.
• 26 Darrell M. West, The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation (Brookings Institution Press 2018).
• 27 Joan Costa-Font and Mario Macis, Social Economics: Current and Emerging Avenues (The MIT Press 2017).
• 28 Siddharth Peter de Souza and Maximilian Spohr, Technology, Innovation and Access to Justice: Dialogues on the Future of Law (Edinburgh University Press 2021), 13.
• 29 Alexandre Biard and others, ‘Introduction: The Future of Access to Justice—Beyond Science Fiction’ in Xandra Kramer and others (eds) New Pathways to Civil Justice in Europe Challenges of Access to Justice (Springer 2021).
• 30 Camino Kavanagh, ‘Artificial Intelligence’ New Tech, New Threats, and New Governance Challenges: An Opportunity to Craft Smarter Responses?’ Web.
• 31 Maria Stefania Cataleta, Humane Artificial Intelligence: The Fragility of Human Rights Facing AI (East-West Center 2020).
• 32 David Freeman Engstrom and Jonah B. Gelbach, ‘Legal Tech, Civil Procedure, and the Future of Adversarialism’ (2021) 169 SLS 1001.
• 33 Emre Bayamlioğlu and others, Being Profiled: Cogitas Ergo Sum. 10 Years of ‘Profiling the European Citizen’ (Amsterdam University Press, 2018).
• 34 Marc Lauritsen, ‘Law Practice Management: Marketing Real Lawyers in te Age of Artificial Intelligence’ (2017) 34(4) GPSolo 68.
• 35 Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, ‘A Common Law for the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Incremental Adjudication, Institutions, and Relational Non-Arbitrariness’ (2019) 119(7) Columbia Law Review 1773.
• 36 Gary Marchant and Josh Covey, ‘Robo-Lawyers: Your New Best Friend or Your Worst Nightmare?’ (2018) 45(1) Litigation 27.
• 37 Alexandre Biard and others, ‘Introduction: The Future of Access to Justice—Beyond Science Fiction’ in Xandra Kramer and others (eds) New Pathways to Civil Justice in Europe Challenges of Access to Justice (Springer 2021).
• 38 Maria Lucia Passador, ‘Challenging Arbitration: How Can Its History Inform Its Current (E-) Practice?’ (2017) 24(2) Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution 233.