International Law

Reports of a PRC ?Virtual Court? Are Highly Exaggerated

By Stan

Can’t tell you how excited I became when I saw this headline from JLM:

E-Disputes to be Settled in Virtual Court

Images ran through my mind of virtual courtrooms designed for online games such as Second Life, with plaintiffs, judges and defendants attending with bizarre avatars. That would be totally cool, and way ahead of the curve.

I was sucked in by the headline but disappointed with the newsbit content:

The China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) will offer the option of mediating commercial disputes online from May 1 this year. The online arbitration regulation stipulates that all contractual and non-contractual trade disputes can be resolved through online courts of arbitration, though CIETAC noted on its website that online mediation will be of particular use to online businesses. Online courts of arbitration will take at least 15 days from accepting a case before producing a written verdict, and the minimum cost of arbitration will be RMB 4,000.

The regulation also notes that from its effective date, electronic signatures will carry the same legal weight as a hand-written signature or a seal.

Bummer. This is just an announcement of the availability of online arbitration with CIETAC. Not a bad development, but I have a feeling there is no “virtual court” in the works anytime soon. Online submission of documents and judgments, if that is what we are talking about here, is certainly welcome for time and cost savings.

CIETAC’s track record on cost and efficiency has been mixed of late. One of their areas of authority is domain name arbitrations, based on ICANN’s UDRP dispute resolution model. The goals of domain name dispute resolution include speed and low cost — domain names are cheap, but important, and most people do not want to invest a huge sum into a domain name fight. CIETAC recently raised its fees for domain name arbitration, moving away significantly from the goals of the original ICANN policy.

Let’s hope the new online options are a sign of more user-friendly CIETAC procedures. If I can’t have a real virtual court, this would be the next best option.

© Stan for China Hearsay, 2009. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us

Full post as published by China Hearsay on April 29, 2009 (boomark / email).