Núm. 1 (2026): From Gavel to Grid: Reimagining Civil Justice in the Digital Era
Artículos

Civil Dispute Resolution in The Age Of Algorithms: an Empirical Study of AI in Labour Law Courts

PDF (Inglés) HTML (Inglés)
  • Esra Palit,
  • Marco Giacalone
Esra Palit
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Marco Giacalone
Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Publicado 2026-06-27

Palabras clave

  • access to justice,
  • digital justice,
  • civil dispute resolution,
  • artificial intelligence,
  • empirical study

Derechos de autor 2026 Esra Palit, Marco Giacalone

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.

Cómo citar

Civil Dispute Resolution in The Age Of Algorithms: an Empirical Study of AI in Labour Law Courts. (2026). Revista Ítalo-española De Derecho Procesal, 1, 285-305. https://doi.org/10.37417/rivitsproc/3341

Resumen

Digitalisation and Artificial Intelligence (AI) are promoted as tools to enhance access to justice, yet their use in courts raises concerns for fundamental rights. This article examines labour law courts through a mixed-method approach combining EU legal analysis with qualitative research conducted in six Member States. It identifies uneven levels of digital maturity and a cautious uptake towards predictive algorithms, revealing persistent governance and institutional capacity constraints.

PDF (Inglés) HTML (Inglés)

Descargas

Los datos de descarga todavía no están disponibles.

Referencias

  1. Busuioc, M. (2020). Accountable artificial intelligence: Holding algorithms to account. Public Administration Review , 81 (5), 825-836. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13293
  2. Cappelletti, M., & Garth, B. (1978). Access-to-justice: The newest wave in the worldwide movement to make rights effective. Buffalo Law Review , 181-292. https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview/vol27/iss2/1/
  3. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union . OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, pp. 391–407. http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj
  4. Constantino, J. (2022). Exploring Article 14 of the EU AI proposal: Human-in-the-loop challenges when overseeing high-risk AI systems in public service organisations. International Law Journal of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam , 14(3). 1-17. https://reference-global.com/download/article/10.0000/up-j-alf.464.pdf
  5. Cortés, P. (2010). Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers in the European Union (1st ed.) . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203847756 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203847756-1
  6. Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). (2018). European ethical charter on the use of artificial intelligence in judicial systems . Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-european-ethical-charter-on-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-ai-in-judicial-systems-and-their-environment
  7. Council of Europe, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms , Council of Europe Treaty Series 005, 1950. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/european-convention-on-human-rights-echr.html
  8. Enqvist, L. (2023). Human oversight in the EU Artificial Intelligence Act: What, when and by whom? Law, Innovation and Technology , 15(2), 508-535. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683
  9. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) & Council of Europe. (2016). Handbook on European law relating to access-to-justice. Publications Office of the European Union . https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2016/handbook-european-law-relating-access-justice
  10. European Union. (2009). Multi-annual European e-Justice action plan 2009-2013 . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=oj:JOC_2009_075_R_0001_01
  11. European Union. (2014). Multiannual European e-Justice action plan 2014-2018 . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014XG0614(01)
  12. European Union. (2019). Multiannual European e-Justice action plan 2019-2023 . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52019XG0313%2802%29
  13. Ferraris, A. F., Picariello, S., & Giacalone, M. (in press). Family asset division in the era of digital by default. European Journal of Law and Technology , XX(Y).
  14. Fink, M. (2026 forthcoming). Human Oversight under Article 14 of the EU AI Act. In Gianclaudio Malgieri, Gloria González Fuster, Alessandro Mantelero, and Gabriela Zanfir-Fortuna (eds), AI Act Commentary: A Thematic Analysis . Hart-Bloomsbury.
  15. Galanter, M. (1981). Justice in many rooms: Courts, private ordering, and indigenous law. Journal of Legal Pluralism , 13(19), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1981.10756257 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1981.10756257
  16. Giacalone, M., Hyder-Rahman, N., Fonisto, M., & Amato, F. (2025a). Enhancing access-to-justice via LLMs in the field of asset division: CREA2 and the digital journey. European Journal of Law and Technology , 16(2).
  17. Giacalone, M., Lupo, G., Sbarro, A., & Molinari, M. (2025b). Deliverable 2.3 - Final Report and Guidelines of IDEA project. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17552958
  18. Greenstein, S. (2022). Preserving the rule of law in the era of artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence and Law , 30(3), 291-323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09294-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09294-4
  19. Harvey, D. (2016). From Susskind to Briggs: Online court approaches. Journal of Civil Litigation and Practice , 5(2), 84-95.
  20. High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI HLEG). (2019). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. European Commission . https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
  21. Inchausti, F. G. (2024). The new regulation on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation in the European Union: Something old, something new, something borrowed and something blue. ERA Forum . 535-552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-024-00782-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-024-00782-z
  22. Koulu, R. (2020). Proceduralising control and discretion: Human oversight in artificial intelligence policy. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law , 27(6), 720-735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X20978649 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X20978649
  23. Kramer, X., Biard, A., Hoevenaars, J., & Themeli, E. (Eds.). (2021). New Pathways to Civil Justice in Europe: Challenges of Access-to-justice. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66637-8
  24. Ontanu, E. A. (2024). e-Justice governance in the EU. In D. R. Troitiño (Ed.), e-Governance in the European Union: Strategies, tools, and implementation (pp. 243-258). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56045-3_16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56045-3_16
  25. Parker, C. (1999). Just lawyers: Regulation and access-to-justice . Oxford University Press on Demand. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198268413.001.0001
  26. Regulation (EU) 2022/850. Regulation (EU) 2022/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on a computerised system for the cross-border electronic exchange of data in the area of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters (e-CODEX system), and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1726 (Text with EEA relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/850/oj/eng
  27. Regulation (EU) 2023/2844. Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters, and amending certain acts in the field of judicial cooperation. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2844/oj/eng
  28. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (Text with EEA relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng
  29. Reiling, D. (2009). Technology for justice: How information technology can support judicial reform . Leiden University Press. https://home.hccnet.nl/a.d.reiling/html/dissertation%20texts/Reiling%20Technology%20for%20Justice.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.5117/9789087280710
  30. Sackville, R. (2004). Some thoughts on access-to-justice. New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law , 2(1), 85-111. https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/public-law/publications/nz-journal-of-public-and-international-law/previous-issues/volume-2-issue-1-june-2004/sackville.pdf
  31. Sorabji, J. (2021). Justice without lawyers. In X. Kramer, A. Biard, J. Hoevenaars, & E. Themeli (Eds.), New pathways to civil justice in Europe: Challenges of access to justice (pp. 221–242). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66637-8
  32. Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Protocols Annexes to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 Tables of equivalences. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12016ME%2FTXT
  33. Velicogna, M. (2007). Justice systems and ICT: What can be learned from Europe? Utrecht Law Review , 3(1), 129-147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.41
  34. Velicogna, M., Steigenga, E., Taal, S., & Schmidt, A. (2020). Connecting EU jurisdictions: Exploring how to open justice across member states through ICT. Social Science Computer Review , 38(3), 274-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318786949 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318786949
  35. Woolf, H. (1996). Access to justice: Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the Civil Justice System in England and Wales. Stationery Office.

Update cookies preferences