MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206072896 · doi:10.32508/stdjelm.v5i3.804

E-Court in resolving civil cases - Foreign experiences and recommendations for Vietnam

2021· article· en· W4206072896 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nguyễn Thị Hồng Nhung, Huynh Thi Nam Hai, Luu Minh Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueScience & Technology Development Journal - Economics - Law and Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawContext (archaeology)BusinessGovernment (linguistics)Order (exchange)Procedural lawSettlement (finance)Political scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Applying digital technology in state management activities is a trend that many countries are actively implementing. Experiences from other foreign countries show that digitizing and technologizing judicial activities is an inevitable trend to simplify administrative procedures, maximize the settlement of disputes to ensure legitimate rights of people, and to maintain social order. Vietnam is therefore not out of that trend. However, the application of information technology to the Court's activities in Vietnam has just been initially organized through a number of activities such as online filing, electronic case management..., but for the online trial, the Vietnamese law still does not have a complete legal framework. In the context of Covid-19 epidemy, the employment of E-court becomes even more necessary than ever. Because of social distancing, many activities, including court trial have been postponed. This can cause many inconveniences to the court (to comply with the law on procedural time), and to the parties (who wants to solve their legal issues as quick as possible, so that they can enjoy well their legal rights and interests). However, this model of court needs many conditions to be developed: investment of Government, qualifications of competent persons, people’s scientific and technical level… It should be noted that technological measures are just a different implementation method of the procedural provisions, but due to being as the procedural law, these implementation steps should be clearly specified in the law, so as not to be considered a violation of the proceedings. Thus, the contents of law need to be legalized such as applicable conditions, procedures on initiating a lawsuit, on giving announcement to parties... In fact and theory, all kind of civil cases can be judged online as long as the requirements of platform and demand of participating parties are met. And the civil procedure law can add regulations about the online method to some of necessary procedural steps as an additional choice to the parties. The article focuses on recommending the building of a E-Court model in Vietnam in civil proceedings, where this model can be effectively applied due to the civil nature of the case, with the research method of analysis, thesis and comparison with other foreign laws, such as Malaysia, Korea, Australia and Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience & Technology Development Journal - Economics - Law and ManagementSame topicDispute Resolution and Class ActionsFrench-language works237,207