College of Law

This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation of the influence of social networks on how individuals choose to process their legal disputes. The research focuses on business disputes and disputants in Venezuela, a developing economy. Previous socio-legal research adopts a dichotomous view of societies, labeling them as either traditional or modern, and argues that certain forms of disputing processing are differentially preferred by most disputants in each system. This research finds a mix of dispute processing mechanisms and preferences in the Venezuelan business sector. Applying social network theory, I argue that rather than stage of development explaining dispute processing preferences, social networks within the Venezuelan business sector reveal when and why business disputants choose different formal fora and different mechanisms. The research that informs this paper was conducted using a multi-method approach, but the overarching research strategy has been that of a case study. Data obtained from secondary sources, and also from semi-structured interviews with at least seventy respondents was collected from 2002 to 2006. Two cases of disputes processing within the business sector have been analyzed (courts and publicly-sponsored ADR institutions), each one referring to a different mechanism and/or forum that is available to disputants in Venezuela.

This Article describes the blossoming CLF sector by placing it in the context of the fast-growing crowdfunding industry and the alternative litigation finance industry. Part I first explains the basic structure, variations in the types of crowdfunding financing, and the overall impact of crowdfunding, after which this Article turns to highlight the most important issues that arise in the context of alternative litigation finance in Part II. Subsequently, in Part III, the Article explains the main features of the emerging CLF sub-industry and examines the universe of recently launched crowdfunding campaigns geared towards seeking funding for litigated cases. This Part—and the Article—ends with a brief discussion on the possible challenges that affect the development of CLF, and how the sub-industry’s players are addressing them.

This article intends to explore the interplay between different dispute processing mechanisms and fora in the realm of transnational litigation, through the lens of the Chevron-Ecuador legal saga.  My goal is to discuss the transformation of a transnational complex case and the challenges faced by the parties, their procedural strategies, and the perceived advantages of the different mechanisms. In this regard, I will also address the development of mechanisms for the protection of diffuse rights involving the environment; the role of the courts in supervising compliance with judicial remedies, their engagement in activities that go beyond their traditional role as simple adjudicators; and the role of privately formed entities in the administration and supervision of monetary awards in Ecuador.

Several years ago, I was invited to give a presentation at a conference in The Hague about current developments regarding collective litigation in Latin America. The meeting, which was part of a series of international academic events to discuss the global spread of class actions and other forms of collective litigation, gathered a select group of scholars, practitioners, policy analysts, and other professionals from every continent. As in the previous editions of the same conference—held in Oxford, Sidney and Miami—, the general discussion was ambitiously centered on the short and long-term social, economic, and cultural impact of the transformations occurring in many national legal regimes regarding the rules and procedures devised to handle claims arising from large-scale accidents, environmental harms, exposure to toxic materials, defective products, and financial injuries. 1 Although not explicitly labelled that way, a central concept of the conference topic was the regulation and control of risk by state organs, and the role of private actors in the ever-present tension between regulation and deregulation. The panel in which I was participating was among the last in the program, and its scope was to provide a flyover of current regulatory developments across different regions of the world (mine was Latin America). We were also asked to consider integrating into our presentation, some of the discussions from earlier panels, on several specific topics such as third party litigation financing, the role of the mass media in the development of collective litigation, transnational coordination and case management issues, and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments across jurisdictions. Given the broad scope of our session, the presentation offered us co-panelists a unique opportunity to take a step back from the granular analysis of court cases – so familiar to legal scholars – and take a broader and more holistic view of the convoluted relationship between the law in action and the law in the books with regard to collective litigation, and the role of regulation vis-à-vis the idea of a " risk society ". 2

he fascination of popular media with the operation of the legal system is not new. For many years, novelists, playwrights, and screenwriters have produced an endless catalogue of works focused on crime and punishment, trials, lawyers, judges, and other pieces of the intricate puzzle that comprises the legal system. The universe of such works is so vast that it has led to the development of many sub-genres, which have persevered throughout the evolution of the different artistic and intellectual forms of written, oral, and audiovisual expression.

This article, which is based on the research conducted for the General Report 'Relief in Small and Simple Matters in an Age of Austerity' presented at the XV World Congress of Procedural Law, provides a contextualised and broad overview of these phenomena in the United States. After describing the general features of the federal and state judiciaries , including its adversarial model of judging, and the importance of the jury system, the article turns its attention to discuss the factors that affect the cost of litigation in the United States, the different models of litigation funding, the available legal aid mechanisms, and the procedural tools available for handling small and simple disputes. Furthermore , this article briefly revisits the discussion about the effect of austerity on the functioning of the United States legal system on the handling of small and simple matters and ends with a brief conclusion that summarises its contribution and sketches the points for future research on this important topic.

About TDM TDM (Transnational Dispute Management): Focusing on recent developments in the area of Investment arbitration and Dispute Management, regulation, treaties, judicial and arbitral cases, voluntary guidelines, tax and contracting. Visit www.transnational-dispute-management.com for full Terms & Conditions and subscription rates.

This paper explores the manipulative use of the law for political gain. It describes instances in which law is distorted and camouflaged under an apparent goal of pursuing justice, social change, or development, but its real function is to facilitate the attainment of self-interested political gains or other ends. The malleability of law is illustrated in this article with a description of the social programs known as "Misiones Bolivarianas" implemented in Venezuela since 2004. The Misiones were ostensibly portrayed as effective government measures launched to reduce poverty and fight inequality in areas where traditional state institutions had failed. As part of the implementation strategy of its policies geared towards fighting poverty and inequality, the Venezuelan government deployed certain legal tools, namely the enactment of special legislation and the transformation of legal institutions. However, instead of promoting transparency and enhancing accountability, these tools have been used to insulate the Misiones from any form of external oversight, thus leaving them at the mercy of political manipulation and other perverse goals. By looking at the legal tools enacted to assist in the implementation of Venezuela's social policies, this article contributes to the discussion about the instrumentality of law and the impact of the social, political, economic, cultural, and historical factors.