Platform Courts and Online Dispute Resolution: Redefining Access to Justice in the Digital Era

Abstract

The rapid expansion of digital technologies has transformed the administration of justice, giving rise to platform courts and online dispute resolution systems that increasingly operate alongside, and sometimes in place of, traditional judicial institutions. This article presents a comprehensive narrative review of the evolution, conceptual foundations, and comparative regulatory landscape of digital adjudication mechanisms, focusing on how these systems redefine access to justice in contemporary society. The review analyzes early private ODR experiments developed by global platforms, the subsequent emergence of public-sector online courts, and the development of hybrid models that blend platform efficiency with judicial authority. It highlights the opportunities digital systems create—such as enhanced accessibility for geographically remote or marginalized users, reduced time and cost of dispute resolution, and improved user-centered procedural design. Simultaneously, it examines the challenges posed by algorithmic decision-making, digital inequality, private governance, transparency concerns, and the legitimacy gap between platform-based and state-based adjudication. Through a comparative examination of national, regional, and international regulatory frameworks, the article reveals ongoing fragmentation and the absence of standardized principles capable of guiding the future development of platform justice. The analysis underscores the normative implications of digital transformation, emphasizing the need to safeguard fairness, due process, and accountability as digital and automated systems become increasingly integrated into dispute resolution. Ultimately, the article argues that platform courts and ODR present both a transformative opportunity and a complex responsibility: they offer the potential to expand access to justice on an unprecedented scale, yet they also require rigorous regulatory oversight and rights-based design principles to ensure that efficiency does not come at the expense of legitimacy and procedural integrity.