For decades, the EU has been advocating for the use of ADR systems to promote consumers’ access to justice in transnational disputes. The dissertation gives a comprehensive overview of the “first generation” of ADR rules, with the aim of investigating the structural reasons for the failure in bridging the gap between the commercial practice in dispute resolution observed in digital markets and the envisaged development consumers’ ADR in Europe.
The raise of the platform model in digital markets has highlighted the pre-existent need for additional regulation. In particular, VLOPs exercise functions reminiscent of the adjudication of disputes, which were previously carried out exclusively by national legal systems or ADR institutions. The second part of the dissertation builds on the analysis of the phenomenon of digital platforms from a civil law perspective, considering the relevant evolutions of EU law in this area and the doctrinal debate on contractual relationships in the platform economy.
The analysis will finally focus on the internal complaint-handling systems adopted by VLOPs for resolving conflicts between the user and the platform or for adjudicating disputes between users. These systems will be framed as platforms’ online dispute resolution mechanisms (ODR). To support the analysis of the phenomenon, the dissertation will present four case studies of ODR systems currently offered by VLOPs of different categories.
Overall, the dissertation aims to provide a new dimension to the notion of ODR, offering a detailed framework of the role of digital platforms in conflict resolution, also in the light of the Platform-to-business Regulation (UE 1150/2019) and Digital Service Act (UE 2065/2022). It highlights the need for procedural law scholars to focus on this phenomenon to scrutinize dispute resolution operated by digital platforms, also preventing it from becoming a substantial obstacle to citizens’ access to justice.