Abdel Wahab, M. S. ‘Does Technology Emasculate Trust? Confidentiality and Security Concerns in Online Arbitration’ [September 2004] (Special Supplement: Using Technology to Resolve Business Disputes) ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin43–51Google Scholar

Alderman, R. ‘Pre-Dispute Mandatory Arbitration in Consumer Contracts: A Call for Reform’ (Winter 2001) 38 Houston Law Review1237–68Google Scholar

Allison, J. ‘A Process Value Analysis of Decision-Maker Bias: The Case of Economic Conflicts of Interest’ (1995) 32 American Business Law Journal481–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bagner, H. ‘Confidentiality – A Fundamental Principle in International Commercial Arbitration?’ (2001) 18(2) Journal of International Arbitration243–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bailey, S. H., Ching, J. P. L., Gunn, M. J. and Ormerod, D. C.Smith, Bailey and Gunn: On the Modern Legal System, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell 2002)Google Scholar

Bamford, R. ‘Shopping Around: Dealing with Cross-Border Complaints’ (2004) 14(4) Consumer Policy Review108–12Google Scholar

Barak, A. ‘Constitutional Human Rights and Private Law’, in Friedmann, D. and Barak-Erez, D., Human Rights in Private Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001), 13–42Google Scholar

Beyleveld, D. and Brownsword, R.Consent in the Law (Oxford and Portland, Oreg.: Hart Publishing, 2007)Google Scholar

Bingham, L. ‘On Repeat Players, Adhesive Contracts and the Use of Statistics in Judicial Review of Employment Arbitration Awards’ (1998) 29 McGeorge Law Review223–59Google Scholar

Black, W. ‘The Domain Name System’, in Edwards, L. and Waelde, C., Law & the Internet, 2nd edn (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2000), 125–32Google Scholar

Blessing, M. ‘Mandatory Rules of Law Versus Party Autonomy in International Arbitration’ (1997) 14 Journal of International Arbitration23–40Google Scholar

Brisby, P. ‘Dispute Resolution in Telecoms – The Regulatory Perspective’ (2005) 11(1) Computer and Telecommunications Law Review4–9Google Scholar

Brown, H. and Marriott, A.ADR Principles and Practice, 2nd edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1999)Google Scholar

Budnitz, M. ‘Arbitration of Disputes between Consumers and Financial Institutions: A Serious Threat to Consumer Protection’ (1995) 10 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution267–342Google Scholar

Burnstein, M. ‘A Global Network in a Compartmentalised Legal Environment’, in Boele-Woelki, K. and Kessedjian, C. (eds.), Internet: Which Court Decides? Which Law Applies? (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1998), 23–34Google Scholar

Calliess, G.-P. ‘Transnational Consumer Law: Co-Regulation of B2C E-Commerce’ (2007) 3(3) Comparative Research in Law & Political Economy2–54Google Scholar

Cappelletti, M. ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes within the Framework of the World-Wide-Access-to-Justice Movement’ (1993) 56 The Modern Law Review282–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carbonneau, T. ‘Arbitral Justice: The Demise of Due Process in American Law’ (1996) 70 Tulane Law Review1945–67Google Scholar

Carbonneau, T.Cases and Materials on the Law and Practice of Arbitration, 2nd edn (Huntington, NY: Juris Publishing, 2000)Google Scholar

Carbonneau, T.The Law and Practice of Arbitration (Huntington, NY: Juris Publishing, 2004)Google Scholar

Carrington, P. ‘Regulating Dispute Resolution Provisions in Adhesion Contracts’ (Winter 1998) 35 Harvard Journal on Legislation225–31Google Scholar

Chatterjee, N. ‘Arbitration Proceedings under ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy – Myth or Reality?’ (2006) 10 Vindobona Journal of International Commercial Law & Arbitration67–90Google Scholar

Clark, E., Cho, G. and Hoyle, A. ‘Online Dispute Resolution: Present Realities, Pressing Problems and Future Prospects’ (2003) 17(1) International Review of Law, Computers & Technology7–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clarkson, C. M. V. and Hill, J.The Conflict of Laws, 3rd edn (Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Cobb, S. and Rifkin, J. ‘Practice and Paradox: Deconstructing Neutrality in Mediation’ (1991) 16 Law and Social Inquiry25–63Google Scholar

Collins, L.Dicey, Morris & Collins: The Conflict of Laws, 14th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2006)Google Scholar

Conley-Tyler, M. ‘One Hundred and Fifteen and Counting: The State of Online Dispute Resolution 2004’, in Conley-Tyler, M.Katsh, E. and Choi, D. (eds.), Proceedings of the Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution 2004, available from www.odr.info/cyberweek2004_library.php [1 April 2008]Google Scholar

,Consumers International. ‘Disputes in Cyberspace’ (December 2000) ISBN 19023913162, available at www.consumersinternational.org [1 August 2008]

,Department of Commerce and Federal Trade Commission. Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Transactions in the Borderless Online Marketplace (June 2000), available from www.ftc.gov/os/2000/02/altdisputeresolutionfrn.htm [1 July 2008]

Donahey, M. Scott. ‘A Proposal for an Appellate Panel for the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy’ (2001) 18(1) Journal of International Arbitration131–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donahey, M. Scott. ‘The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Process and the Appearance of Partiality – Panelists Impaled on the Horns of a Dilemma’ (2002) 19(1) Journal of International Arbitration33–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doyle, M., Ritters, K. and Brooker, S.Seeking Resolution (research report published by the DTI and the National Consumer Council, January 2004, URN 03/1616)

Drahozal, C. and Friel, R. ‘A Comparative View of Consumer Arbitration’ (2005) 71 Arbitration131–39Google Scholar

,European Consumer Centre Network. The European Online Marketplace: Consumer Complaints 2005 (Stockholm, 2006), available at http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress/ecc_network/european_online_marketplace2006.pdf [1 August 2008]Google Scholar

,European Consumer Centre Network. The European Online Marketplace: Consumer Complaints 2007 (2008), available at http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/docs/ECC_E-commerce_report.pdf [1 August 2008]

Edwards, H. ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema?’ (1986) 99 Harvard Law Review668–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, L. ‘Defamation and the Internet’, in Edwards, L. and Waelde, C., Law & the Internet, 2nd edn (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2000), 249–73Google Scholar

Emerson, C. ‘Wasting Time in Cyberspace: The UDRP's Inefficient Approach toward Arbitrating Internet Domain Name Disputes’ (2004) 34 University of Baltimore Law Review161–97Google Scholar

Fietkau, H.-J. ‘Unscharfe Kommunikation und verzerrte Entscheidungen in der Online Mediation’, in Märker, O. and Trénel, M., Online Mediation (Berlin: Edition Sigma, 2003), 82–104Google Scholar

Fisher, R. & Ury, W.Getting to Yes: Negotiating an Agreement Without Giving In, 2nd edn (London: Random House, 1992)Google Scholar

Fiss, O. ‘Against Settlement’ (1984) 93 Yale Law Journal1073–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flick, G.Natural Justice Principles and Practical Application, 2nd edn (Sydney: Butterworths, 1984)Google Scholar

Foskett, D.The Law and Practice of Compromise, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1996)Google Scholar

Fouchard, P. ‘La Porteé Internationale de l'Annulation de la Sentence Arbitrale dans son Pays d'Origine’ (1997) 3 Revue de l'Arbitrage327–52Google Scholar

Freeman, J. ‘The Private Role in Public Governance’ (2000) 75 New York University Law Review543–675Google Scholar

Freyhold, H., Gessner, V., Vial, E. and Wagner, H. (eds.). Cost of Judicial Barriers for Consumers in the Single Market, A Report for the European Commission, Zentrum für Europäische Rechtspolilik an der Universität Bremen (October/November 2005)

Friendly, H. J. ‘Some Kind of Hearing’ (1975) 123 University of Pennsylvania Law Review1267–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Froomkin, A. M. ‘ICANN's Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy – Causes and (Partial) Cures’ (2002) 67 Brooklyn Law Review 608–718Google Scholar

Fuller, L. ‘Mediation – Its Forms and Functions’ (1971) 44 Southern California Law Review305–39Google Scholar

Fuller, L. ‘The Forms and Limits of Adjudication’ (1978–1979) 92 Harvard Law Review353–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gaillard, E. ‘Transnational Law: A Legal System or a Method of Decision-Making’ (2001) 17(1) Arbitration International59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galanter, M. ‘Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change’ (1974) 9 Law and Society Review95–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galanter, M. and Cahill, M. ‘Most Cases Settle: Judicial Promotion and Regulation of Settlements’ (1994) 46 Stanford Law Review1339–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galligan, D. J.Due Process and Fair Procedures (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Geist, M. ‘Fair.com? An Examination of the Allegations of Systemic Unfairness in the ICANN UDRP’ (2002) 27 Brooklyn Journal of International Law903–37Google Scholar

Genn, H.The Central London County Court Pilot Mediation Scheme Evaluation Report (London: Lord Chancellor's Department, July 1998)Google Scholar

Gibbons, L. J. ‘Private Law, Public “Justice”: Another Look at Privacy, Arbitration and Global E-Commerce’ (2000) 15 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution769–93Google Scholar

Gibbons, L., Kennedy, R. and Gibbs, J. ‘Cyber-Mediation: Computer-Mediated Communications Medium Massaging the Message’ (2002) 32 New Mexico Law Review27–72Google Scholar

Gillies, L. ‘A Review of the New Jurisdiction Rules for Electronic Consumer Contracts within the European Union’ [2001] Journal of Information Law & Technology (eJournal), available from www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt [8 July 2008]

Gillies, L. ‘European Union: Modified Rules of Jurisdiction for Electronic Consumer Contracts’ (2000) 17 Computer Law & Security Report395–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Girsberger, D. and Schramm, D. ‘Cyber-Arbitration’ (2002) 3 European Business Organization Law Review605–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordon, R. ‘The Electronic Personality and Digital Self’ [February/April 2001] Dispute Resolution Journal8–19Google Scholar

Greenberg, D. and Stanton, H. ‘Business Groups, Consumer Problems: The Contradiction of Trade Association Complaint Handling’, in Nader, L. (ed.), No Access to Law (New York, NY: Academic Press, 1980), 193–231Google Scholar

Guiliano, M. and Lagarde, P.Report on the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations, OJ C282 of 31 October 1980

Gunn, J. and Roebuck, W. ‘White Paper on Alternative Dispute Resolution in a Supply Chain Transformed by On-Line Transactions’ (May 2001), available from the eCentre Legal Advisory Group

Habermas, J.Faktizität und Geltung (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1992)Google Scholar

Halpern, M. and Mehrotra, A. ‘Exploring Legal Boundaries within Cyberspace: What Law Controls in a Global Marketplace?’ (2000) 21 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law523–61Google Scholar

Hart, H. L. A.The Concept of Law, 2nd edn (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Heiskanen, V. ‘Dispute Resolution in International Electronic Commerce’ (1999) 16 Journal of International Arbitration29–44Google Scholar

Helfer, L. ‘Whither the UDRP: Autonomous, Americanized or Cosmopolitan?’ (2004) 12 Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law493– 505Google Scholar

Hochstrasser, D. ‘Choice of Law and “Foreign” Mandatory Rules in International Arbitration’ (1994) 11 Journal of International Arbitration57–86Google Scholar

Hörnle, J. ‘Internet Service Provider Liability – Let's Not Play Piggy in the Middle’ (2002) 7(3) Communications Law85–8Google Scholar

Hörnle, J. ‘Online Dispute Resolution’, in Tackaberry, J. and Marriott, A.Bernstein's Handbook of Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Practice, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003)Google Scholar

Hörnle, J. ‘Private International Law and E-Finance: The European Perspective’ (2001) 8 The EDI Law Review209–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hörnle, J. ‘The European Extra Judicial Network – Overcoming the Obstacles’ (2002) 7 Communications Law143–5Google Scholar

Hörnle, J. ‘The Jurisdictional Challenge of the Internet’, in Edwards, L. and Waelde, C., Law & The Internet, 3rd edn (Oxford: Hart Publishing, forthcoming 2008)Google Scholar

Houlden, P., Tour, S., Walker, L. and Thibaut, J. ‘Preferences for Modes of Dispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control’ (1978) 14 Journal of Experimental Social Psychology13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar

ITAA, E-Commerce Taxation and the Limitations of Geolocation Tools, available from www.itaa.org/taxfinance/docs/geolocationpaper.pdf [1 April 2008]

Jaksic, A.Arbitration and Human Rights (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2002)Google Scholar

James, R.Private Ombudsmen and Public Law (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997)Google Scholar

Jarrosson, C. ‘L'Arbitrage et la Convention européenne des droits de l'Homme’ [1989] Revue de l'arbitrage573–607Google Scholar

Johnson, D. and Post, D. ‘Law and Borders – the Rise of Law in Cyberspace’ (1996) 48 Stanford Law Review1367–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katsh, E. and Rifkin, J.Online Dispute Resolution (San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 2001)Google Scholar

Kaufmann-Kohler, G. and Schultz, T.Online Dispute Resolution: Challenges for Contemporary Justice (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2004)Google Scholar

Kouris, S. ‘Confidentiality: Is International Arbitration Losing One of Its Major Benefits?’ (2005) 22(2) Journal of International Arbitration127–40Google Scholar

Kronke, H. ‘Applicable Law in Torts and Contracts in Cyberspace’, in Boele-Woelki, K. and Kessedjian, C. (eds.), Internet: Which Court Decides? Which Law Applies? (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1998), 65–87Google Scholar

Kurkela, M.Due Process in International Commercial Arbitration (New York, NY: Oceana, 2005)Google Scholar

Lessig, L. ‘The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach’ (1999) 113 Harvard Law Review501–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lessig, L.Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace (New York, NY: Basic Books, 1999)Google Scholar

Lew, J. D. M., Mistelis, L. A. and Kröll, S. M.Comparative International Commercial Arbitration (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2003)Google Scholar

Liebscher, C.The Healthy Award (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2003)Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Erickson, B. A., Friedland, N. and Dickenberger, M. ‘Reactions to Procedural Models for Adjudicative Conflict Resolution: A Cross-National Study’ (1978) 22(2) Journal of Conflict Resolution318–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lloyd, I.Legal Aspects of the Information Society (London: Butterworths, 2000)Google Scholar

Lodder, A. and Zeleznikov, J. ‘Developing an Online Dispute Resolution Environment: Dialogue Tools and Negotiation Support Systems in a Three Step Model’ (2005) 10 Harvard Negotiation Law Review287–337Google Scholar

Lowe, V. ‘Jurisdiction’, in Evans, M. (ed.), International Law (Oxford University Press, 2003), 329–55Google Scholar

Lowenfeld, A. ‘The Mitsubishi Case: Another View’ (1986) 2 Arbitration International178–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mackie, K., Miles, D., Marsh, W. and Allen, T.The ADR Practice Guide (London: Butterworths, 2000)Google Scholar

Mann, F. A. ‘The Proper Law in the Conflict of Laws’ (1987) 36 International Comparative Law Quarterly437–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marsden, C. ‘Introduction: Information and Communications Technologies, Globalisation and Regulation’, in Marsden, C. (ed.), Regulating the Global Information Society (London: Routledge, 2000), 1–40Google Scholar

Matscher, F. ‘Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und EMRK’, in Habscheid, W. and Schwab, D., Beiträge zum internationalen Verfahrensrecht und Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit (Münster: Festschrift für Heinrich Nagel, 1987)Google Scholar

Mayer, P. ‘Mandatory Rules of Law in International Arbitration’ (1986) 1 Arbitration International274–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McClean, D. and Beevers, K.Morris on the Conflicts of Law, 6th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2005)Google Scholar

McLaughlin, J. ‘Arbitrability: Current Trends in the United States’ (1996) 12(2) Arbitration International113–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Menkel-Meadow, C. ‘Toward Another View of Legal Negotiation: The Structure of Problem-Solving’ (1983–1984) 31 UCLA Law Review754–842Google Scholar

Merry, S. and Silbey, S. ‘What Do Plaintiffs Want? Reexamining the Concept of Dispute’ (1984) 9(2) Justice System Journal151–78Google Scholar

Mnookin, R. H. ‘The Public/Private Dichotomy: Political Disagreement and Academic Reputation’ (1982) 130 University of Pennsylvania Law Review1429–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mnookin, R. H. and Kornhauser, L. ‘Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce’ (1979) 88 The Yale Law Journal950–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morris, P. and James, R. ‘The Financial Ombudsman Service’ [2002] Public Law640–8Google Scholar

Mueller, M. ‘Rough Justice – An Analysis of ICANN's Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy’ (research report published by the Convergence Center, Syracuse University School of Information Studies, dated November 2000). Also published as ‘Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of ICANN's Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy’ (2001) 17(3) The Information Society153–63Google Scholar

Mustill, L. J. ‘The New Lex Mercatoria – The First Twenty-Five Years’ (1987) 4(2) Arbitration International86–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nader, L. ‘Alternatives to the American Judicial System’, in Nader, L., No Access to Law: Alternatives to the American Legal System (New York, NY: Academic Press, 1980)Google Scholar

Nader, L. and Shugart, C. ‘Old Solutions for Old Problems’, in Nader, L.No Access to Law: Alternatives to the American Legal System (New York, NY: Academic Press, 1980), 57–102Google Scholar

Nobles, R. ‘Keeping Ombudsmen in their Place’ [2001] Public Law308–28Google Scholar

North, P. and Fawcett, J.Cheshire and North's Private International Law, 13th edn (London: Butterworths, 1999)Google Scholar

OECD. ‘Guidelines for Consumer Protection in the Context of Electronic Commerce’ (9 December 1999), available from www.oecd.org/document/51/0,2340,en_2649_34267_1824435_1_1_1_1,00.html

OECD. ‘Online Payment Systems for E-Commerce’ (2006 Report, 18 April 2006), available from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/37/19/36736056.pdf [1 April 2008]

OFT, Unfair Contract Terms Guidance (February 2001)

Park, W.Procedural Evolution in Business Arbitration (Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Partasides, C. ‘International Commercial Arbitrations’, in Tackaberry, J. and Marriott, A.Bernstein's Handbook of Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Practice, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003), 651–706Google Scholar

Patel, A. ‘Consumer Protection and Redress – The Wider Context’ (2000) 3 Electronic Business Law9–10Google Scholar

Paulsson, J. ‘Delocalisation of International Commercial Arbitration: When and Why It Matters’ (1983) 32 International and Comparative Law Quarterly53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Perritt, H. ‘Dispute Resolution in Cyberspace: Demand for New Forms of ADR’ (2000) 15 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution675–703Google Scholar

Perritt, H. ‘The Internet is Changing the Public International Legal System’ (1999–2000) 88 Kentucky Law Journal885–955Google Scholar

Petrochilos, G.Procedural Law in International Arbitration (Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar

Philippe, M. ‘NetCase: A New ICC Arbitration Facility’ [2004] (Special Supplement) ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin53–61Google Scholar

Philippe, M. ‘Where is Everyone Going with Online Dispute Resolution?’ (2002) 2 International Business Law Journal167–210Google Scholar

Ponte, L. and Cavenagh, T.Cyberjustice (New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005)Google Scholar

Price, M. E. and Verhulst, S. G. ‘In Search of the Self’, in Marsden, C.Regulating the Global Information Society (London and New York, NY: Routledge, 2000)Google Scholar

Protopsaltou, D., Schultz, T. and Magnenat-Thalmann, N. ‘Taking the Fourth Party Further? Considering a Shared Virtual Workspace for Arbitration’ (2006) 15(2) Information & Communications Technology Law157–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Qureshi, K. ‘Conflict of Interest’ (2004) 154 New Law Journal1400–1Google Scholar

Rau, A. S. ‘Integrity in Private Judging’ (1997) 38 South Texas Law Review485–539Google Scholar

Rawls, J.A Theory of Justice, revised edn (Oxford University Press, 1999)Google Scholar

Redfern, A. and Hunter, M.Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2004)Google Scholar

Redish, M. H. and Marshall, L. C. ‘Adjudicatory Independence and the Values of Procedural Due Process’ (1986) 95 Yale Law Journal455–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reed, A. ‘Jurisdiction and Choice of Law in a Borderless Electronic Environment’, in Akdeniz, Y., Walker, C. and Wall, D. (eds.), The Internet Law and Society (Harlow: Longman, 2000), 79–106Google Scholar

Reed, C.Internet Law, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reidenberg, J. ‘Governing Networks and Rule-Making in Cyberspace’ (1996) 45 Emory Law Journal911–30Google Scholar

Reuben, R. ‘Constitutional Gravity: A Unitary Theory of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Public Civil Justice’ (2000) 47 UCLA Law Review949–1104Google Scholar

Richardson, G. and Genn, H. ‘Tribunals in Transition: Resolution or Adjudication’ [2007] Public Law116–41Google Scholar

Riddall, J. G.Jurisprudence (London: Butterworths, 1999)Google Scholar

Robinson, P. ‘Centuries of Contract Common Law Can't Be All Wrong’ [2003] Journal of Dispute Resolution135–73Google Scholar

Robinson, W. and Kasolowsky, B. ‘Will the United Kingdom's Human Rights Act Further Protect Parties to Arbitration Proceedings?’ (2002) 18(4) Arbitration International453–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross Saxer, S. ‘One Professor's Approach to Increasing Technology Use in Legal Education’ (1999–2000) 6 Richmond Journal of Law and Technology21–57Google Scholar

Rule, C.Online Dispute Resolution for Business (San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 2002)Google Scholar

Rutherford, M. ‘Documents-Only Arbitrations in Consumer Disputes’, in Tackaberry, J. and Marriott, A., Bernstein's Handbook of Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Practice, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003)Google Scholar

Samuel, A. ‘Arbitration, Alternative Dispute Resolution Generally and the European Convention on Human Rights’ (2004) 21(5) Journal of International Arbitration413–38Google Scholar

Schiavetta, S. ‘The Relationship between e-ADR and Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights Pursuant to the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ [2004] (1) Journal of Information Law and Technology, available at www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2004_1/schiavetta [1 August 2008]Google Scholar

Schlosser, P. ‘Jurisdiction and International Judicial and Administrative Co-operation’ (2000) 284 Recueil des Cours9–430Google Scholar

Schu, R. ‘The Applicable Law to Consumer Contracts Made over the Internet: Consumer Protection through Private International Law?’ (1997) 5 International Journal of Law and Information Technology192–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schultz, T. ‘Does Online Dispute Resolution Need Governmental Intervention?’ (2004) 6 North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology71–106Google Scholar

Schultz, T. ‘Human Rights: A Speed Bump for Arbitral Procedures?’ (2006) 9(1) International Arbitration Law Review8–23Google Scholar

Shaw, M. N.International Law, 5th edn (Cambridge University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sternlight, J. ‘Panacea or Corporate Tool?: Debunking the Supreme Court's Preference for Binding Arbitration’ (Fall 1996) 74 Washington University Law Quarterly637–712Google Scholar

Summers, R. S. ‘Evaluating and Improving Legal Processes – A Plea for “Process Values”’ (1974) 60 Cornell Law Review1–52Google Scholar

Susskind, R.Transforming the Law (Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar

Tackaberry, J. and Marriott, A. ‘General Principles’, in Tackaberry, J. and Marriott, A., Bernstein's Handbook of Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Practice, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003)Google Scholar

Tedeschi, B. ‘E-Commerce: Borders Returning to the Internet’, New York Times (2 April 2001)

Tedeschi, B. ‘Putting It in Its Place’, The Economist (9 August 2001)

Teitz, L. ‘Providing Legal Services for the Middle Class in Cyberspace: The Promise and Challenge of Online Dispute Resolution’ (2001) 70 Fordham Law Review985–1016Google Scholar

Thiessen, E. and McMahon, J. ‘Beyond Win-Win in Cyberspace’ (2000) 15 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution643–67Google Scholar

Thornburg, E. ‘Fast, Cheap and Out of Control: Lessons from the ICANN Dispute Resolution Process’ (Spring 2002) 6 Journal of Small and Emerging Business Law191–233Google Scholar

Thornburg, E. ‘Going Private: Technology, Due Process and Internet Dispute Resolution’ (Fall 2000) 34 UC Davis Law Review151–220Google Scholar

Treitel, G.The Law of Contract, 11th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003)Google Scholar

Tschentscher, A. ‘The Function of Procedural Justice in Theories of Justice’, in Röhl, K. and Machura, S. (eds.), Procedural Justice (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997), 105–19Google Scholar

Tweedale, A. ‘Confidentiality in Arbitration and the Public Interest Exception’ (2005) 21(1) Arbitration International59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berg, A.The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958 (Deventer: Kluwer, 1981)Google Scholar

Vidmar, N. ‘Procedural Justice and Alternative Dispute Resolution’, in Röhl, K. and Machura, S. (eds.), Procedural Justice (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997), 121–36Google Scholar

Voser, N. ‘Mandatory Rules of Law as a Limitation on the Law Applicable in International Commercial Arbitration’ (1996) 7 American Review of International Arbitration319–57Google Scholar

Wallace, R.International Law, 4th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2002)Google Scholar

Ware, S. ‘Default Rules from Mandatory Rules: Privatizing Law through Arbitration’ (1999) 83 Minnesota Law Review703–54Google Scholar

Ware, S. ‘Domain Name Arbitration in the Arbitration-Law Context: Consent to, and Fairness in the UDRP’ (2002) 6 Journal of Small and Emerging Business Law129–65Google Scholar

Wiener, A. ‘Regulations and Standards for Online Dispute Resolution’, dated 15 February 2001

Wiener, J.Globalisation and the Harmonization of Law (London and New York, NY: Pinter, 1999)Google Scholar

Woolf, , The Right Honourable Lord. ‘Access to Justice’ (Department of Constitutional Affairs, June 2005)