BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:https://murmitoyen.com/events/vanille/udem/
X-WR-TIMEZONE:America/Montreal
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:69debe7271c67
DTSTAMP:20260414T182346
DTSTART:20150310T163000
SEQUENCE:0
TRANSP:OPAQUE
DTEND:20150310T163000
URL:https://murmitoyen.com/events/vanille/udem/detail/590421-dispute-resolu
 tion-technology-n-disintegrating-rationalities-justificatory-structures
LOCATION:Université de Montréal - Pavillon Maximilien-Caron\, 3101\, chem
 in de la tour\, Montréal\, QC\, Canada\, H3T 1J7
SUMMARY:Dispute Resolution & Technology – Disintegrating Rationalities\, 
 Justificatory Structures
DESCRIPTION:En anglais seulement.Conférence de Riikka Koulu\, Laboratoire 
 de cyberjustice\, University of Helsinki.Organisée par la Chaire Lexum en
  information juridique.Several interfaces between dispute resolution and t
 echnology exist\, from technology-enhanced trials with VC and case managem
 ent systems to automated procedures and ODR\, both public and private. Whe
 n the environment of dispute resolution changes\, we need to ask whether d
 ue process can still be evaluated under the same criteria as earlier or do
 es it\, too\, change? In order to answer this\, we need to dig further\, t
 o the underlying objectives of dispute resolution. For centuries\, the int
 erests of the state have been preserved in conflict management through the
  adoption of a state monopoly for dispute resolution as the descriptive an
 d constitutive concept which bases the justification of use of coercive fo
 rce on sovereignty\, on democracy.Similarly\, private autonomy and freedom
  of contract are engaged to justify dispute resolution outside the courts\
 , a practice coexisting along the state monopoly. Also\, a shift towards a
 ccess to justice as a source of justification can be found. The emergence 
 of technology\, increase of cross-border ecommerce cases\, and the possibi
 lity for internal enforcement mechanisms of ODR bring into question the ut
 ility of these justificatory structures. Depending on these issues concret
 e questions arise: which models of dispute resolution do we accept\, who m
 akes this decision\, on which mandate\, and more importantly\, what should
  be the future of dispute resolution?Conformément au Règlement sur la fo
 rmation continue obligatoire des avocats\, cette activité a fait l’obje
 t d’une demande de reconnaissance auprès du Barreau du Québec pour une
  durée prévue de 2 heures.
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Montreal
X-LIC-LOCATION:America/Montreal
END:VTIMEZONE
END:VCALENDAR