traders and their branch organizations to inform consumers of the availability of such procedures, i.e., availability of ADR mechanisms pursuant to Directive 2013/11/EU and ODR platforms pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 524/2013.8 Apart from the benefits of ICT tools and Legal Tech in relation to ODR (facilitating individuals’ access to justice, enabling rapid and efficient settlement of consumer disputes, at a lower cost and in a less conflictual manner than conventional litigation, affording more flexibility in the choice of procedures used and solutions offered), the committee notes that ODR procedures may come with certain challenges, including technical issues, inequalities in individuals’ access to online resources, privacy issues and problems regarding enforcement of decisions. Similarly, institutional reports and legal doctrine identify the lack of awareness of ADR and ODR mechanisms and the lack of incentives for their use as the most important hindrances to their growth.9 At the EU level, the ADR Directive attempts to mitigate this by requiring traders to inform consumers about ADR entities which are competent to resolve consumers' complaints, and the ODR Regulation requires online traders to provide a link to the ODR platform. At the global level, development of Practical Handbook/Guide under the auspices of HCCH will certainly have positive effect in mitigating lack of awareness of international tourists on the existing ODR mechanisms in different legal jurisdictions. However, a key element that is missing from the European redress system but that is crucial to its success is the development of incentives in order to ensure parties' participation in an ADR/ODR process, the early settlement of complaints and compliance with final outcomes. The list of possible incentives that might be taken into an account has been already provided and analyzed in the legal doctrine and is given below in a summarized manner:10 8 Within the EU, tourism-related disputes can be resolved by the dispute resolution bodies of general competence (Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Romania) or special competence bodies dealing with package travel, stand-alone services (Belgium, Denmark, France and Luxembourg), travel contracts (Austria, Germany), air passenger rights (Norway, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy), and time-sharing (Spain, Portugal). See: Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Air Passenger Rights Sector, http://cecluxembourg.lu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ADR-APR-2015-FINAL.pdf 9 European Commission, Communication on Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes in the Single Market COM(2011) 791, p. 2, 6; Cortes, P., pp. 131. 10 Cortes, P., pp. 132-140.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==