Publicação
AI-Assisted Mediation: Algorithmic Impartiality, ODR, and Regulatory Challenges within the Framework of the European AI Act
| Resumo: | The year 2024 brought two European regulations to the field of conflict mediation which, together, create a first-order normative paradox. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the "AI Act," classifies artificial intelligence systems used in alternative dispute resolution as high-risk systems; Regulation (EU) 2024/3228 closed the European ODR platform, which processed around 200 cases per year with an acceptance rate by traders of only 2%. The European legislator thus recognized the importance of AI systems in ADR by subjecting them to the more demanding regime of the Regulation and at the same time dismantled the only European public instrument for online dispute resolution, leaving the field open to private platforms operating outside any specific institutional framework. This article analyzes the legal implications of this paradox for three fundamental pillars of Law No. 29/2013, of April 19: the principle of impartiality, the confidentiality regime, and the enforceability of the mediation agreement. It concludes that the current regulatory framework, both European and Portuguese, presents structural gaps that require urgent legislative intervention. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Ruivo, Vítor |
| Assunto: | Inteligência Artificial Mediação Online ODR Regulamento IA AI Act AI Regulation AI Artificial Intelligence ODR Online Mediation |
| Ano: | 2026 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Tipo de acesso: | unknown |
| Instituição associada: | Ponteditora |
| Idioma: | português |
| Origem: | J2 - Jornal Jurídico |
| Resumo: | The year 2024 brought two European regulations to the field of conflict mediation which, together, create a first-order normative paradox. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the "AI Act," classifies artificial intelligence systems used in alternative dispute resolution as high-risk systems; Regulation (EU) 2024/3228 closed the European ODR platform, which processed around 200 cases per year with an acceptance rate by traders of only 2%. The European legislator thus recognized the importance of AI systems in ADR by subjecting them to the more demanding regime of the Regulation and at the same time dismantled the only European public instrument for online dispute resolution, leaving the field open to private platforms operating outside any specific institutional framework. This article analyzes the legal implications of this paradox for three fundamental pillars of Law No. 29/2013, of April 19: the principle of impartiality, the confidentiality regime, and the enforceability of the mediation agreement. It concludes that the current regulatory framework, both European and Portuguese, presents structural gaps that require urgent legislative intervention. |
|---|