Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International E-Government Development pp 39–72Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

E-Justice in Europe: From National Experiences to EU Cross-Border Service Provision

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to shed some light on the Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) development and implementation in the justice domain (the so-called e-Justice), and to glance at the key elements of this emerging phenomenon, building on the European Union experience at national and Community level. Although ICTs are increasingly at the core of the functioning of the justice service provision in modern democracies, their implementation and deployment, and the complex intertwining between law, technology and organizations, which characterize e-Justice experiences, remains poorly understood. The analysis of concrete e-Justice cases allows clarification of some of the practical implications of different experiences, providing useful indications of the elements which have made feasible the development of effective e-Justice systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See for example Contini F., G.F. Lanzara (Eds) (2009), ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. European Perspectives in the making of e-government, Palgrave, London; A. Cerrillo and P. Fabra (Eds) (2009), Information and Communication Technologies in the Court System, IGI Global, Hershey PA, USA; Velicogna, M. (2008) Use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in European judicial systems—CEPEJ Studies No. 7; Fabri M. (Ed) (2007), Information and Communication Technologies for the Public Prosecutor’s Office, Clueb, Bologna.

  2. 2.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/520203/money-claim-online-user-guide.pdf. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  3. 3.

    https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/northampton-county-court-business-centre. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  4. 4.

    http://www.gateway.gov.uk. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  5. 5.

    http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/onlineservices2/mcol_system/conditions.htm.

  6. 6.

    For the full list of criteria see: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/onlineservices2/important_info/claim_criteria.htm. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  7. 7.

    HMCTS Money Claim Online (MCOL)—User Guide for Claimants.

  8. 8.

    HMCTS Money Claim Online (MCOL)—User Guide for Claimants.

  9. 9.

    http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/mcol.htm. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  10. 10.

    Electronic transmission of original documents and attachments to submissions to the courts in electronic legal communication was not possible. In fact, only from “January 1st 2007 the electronic signature of justice has been applied in practice. Since then the electronic signature of justice confirms the authenticity of commercial register excerpts and documents stored in the electronic archives of land and commercial register” http://www.epractice.eu/files/documents/cases/1449-1179822942.pdf. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  11. 11.

    https://www.justiz.gv.at/web2013/home/e-government/elektronischer_rechtsverkehr_erv ~2c9484852308c2a60123708554d203e7.de.html. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  12. 12.

    The Simple Object Access Protocol, is a protocol specification for exchanging structured information on the implementation of Web Services.

  13. 13.

    https://www.justiz.gv.at/web2013/home/e-government/elektronischer_rechtsverkehr_erv ~2c9484852308c2a60123708554d203e7.de.html. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  14. 14.

    https://www.justiz.gv.at/web2013/home/e-government/elektronischer_rechtsverkehr_erv ~2c9484852308c2a60123708554d203e7.de.html. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  15. 15.

    http://archives.cnb.avocat.fr/lettre_conseil/LDC_09-2007/fichiers/convention-nouvelles-technologies.pdf. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  16. 16.

    http://archives.cnb.avocat.fr/lettre_conseil/LDC_09-2007/fichiers/convention-nouvelles-technologies.pdf. Last accessed on 10/10/2016.

  17. 17.

    http://www.ebarreau.fr/actus.php. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  18. 18.

    https://faq.avocat.fr/index.php?action=artikel&cat=24&id=123&artlang=fr. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  19. 19.

    M.Fabri, and Contini, F. (eds.) (2001) Justice and Technology in Europe: How ICT is Changing the Judicial Business, Kluwer Law International.

  20. 20.

    Draft strategy on European e-Justice 2014-2018, OJ C 376, 21.12.2013, p. 7–11.

  21. 21.

    COM(2008) 329 final.

  22. 22.

    COM(2008)329 final p. 4.

  23. 23.

    (2008/2125 (INI)).

  24. 24.

    Draft strategy on European e-Justice 2014-2018 OJ C 376, 21.12.2013, p. 7.

  25. 25.

    Multi-annual European e-Justice action plan 2009-2013 OJ C 75, 31.3.2009, pp. 1–12.

  26. 26.

    Ibidem p. 2.

  27. 27.

    Ibidem. IDABC stands for Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernment Services to public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens.

  28. 28.

    COM(2008)329 final p. 2.

  29. 29.

    Draft Strategy on European e-Justice 2014-2018 (2013/C 376/06).

  30. 30.

    Ibidem.

  31. 31.

    Ibidem.

  32. 32.

    http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-956_en.htm. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  33. 33.

    Reding V. quoted at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-956_en.htm. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  34. 34.

    Ibidem.

  35. 35.

    Ibidem.

  36. 36.

    Draft Strategy on European e-Justice 2014-2018 (2013/C 376/06).

  37. 37.

    https://www.ejn-crimjust.europa.eu/ejn/AtlasChooseMeasure.aspx?MP=0&Cou=295. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  38. 38.

    http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/index_en.htm. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  39. 39.

    http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/cc_searchmunicipality_en.jsp#statePage0. Accessed on 07/10/2016.

  40. 40.

    https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_find_a_lawyer-334-en.do. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  41. 41.

    http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/NTCdocument/FAL2_page_EN_webpdf1_1366020243.pdf. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  42. 42.

    https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/eu-trusted-lists-trust-service-providers. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  43. 43.

    e-CODEX Technical Annex, website etc.

  44. 44.

    e-CODEX technical Deliverables, e-CODEX D7.6.

  45. 45.

    Velicogna, M. (2014). Coming to Terms with Complexity Overload in Transborder e-Justice: The e-CODEX Platform. In The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice (pp. 309–330). Springer Netherlands.

  46. 46.

    Velicogna, M., & and Lupo, G. (2016). From drafting common rules to implementing electronic European Civil Procedures: the rise of e-CODEX. Presented at the “From common rules to best practices in European Civil Procedure” conference, 25 and 26 February 2016, Rotterdam.

  47. 47.

    Steigenga E. & M. Velicogna (2016), Envisioning the next step in e-justice: In search of the key to provide easy access to cross border Justice for all users.

  48. 48.

    e-CODEX is funded through the ICT Policy Support Programme (ICT PSP) under the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). Within the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP), the ICT PSP is part of the European Union effort to exploit the potential of the new information and communication technologies.

  49. 49.

    e-CODEX is funded through the ICT Policy Support Programme under the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP).

  50. 50.

    PEPPOL: e-procurement, epSOS: e-health, STORK: e-identity and SPOCS: e-business services. More information can be found here:

    http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1250. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  51. 51.

    e-CODEX Technical Annex V.1.1 p. 11.

  52. 52.

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:075:0001:0012:EN:PDF. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  53. 53.

    Austria, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Malta and Poland, while France and the EU Commission were in the testing phase.

  54. 54.

    Austria, Czech Republic, Malta and Poland, while France and the EU Commission were in the testing phase.

  55. 55.

    Austria, Ireland, Italy.

  56. 56.

    Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, while Greece is in the testing phase.

  57. 57.

    France and the Netherlands, while Germany and Hungary are in the testing phase.

  58. 58.

    http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2015774%202014%20INIT, p. 6. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  59. 59.

    http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/NTCdocument/FAL2_page_EN_webpdf1_1366020243.pdf. Accessed on 10/10/2016.

  60. 60.

    As the work to link FAL2 with e-CODEX will take more time than first expected, the work on FAL3 needs to be postponed. This means that the testing of the Lawyer2Court use case will be done after the end of e-CODEX Source: e-CODEX Deliverable D3.13 Update of D3.4 Test Findings of Tests.

References

  • Bauer, P., & Graf, C. (2003). Judicial electronic data interchange in Austria. In M. Fabri & F. Contini (Eds.), Judicial electronic data interchange in Europe (pp. 103–123). Bologna: Lo Scarabeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borsari, G., et al. (2011). D7.1 Governance and guidelines definition. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borsari, G., et al. (2012). D7.3 High level architecture definition. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carboni, N. (2014). From quality to access to justice: Improving the functioning of European judicial systems. Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences, 3(131).

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevali, D. (2009). e-Justice and policies on risk management. In A. Cerrillo & P. Fabra (Eds.), e-Justice. Using information communication technologies in the court system (pp. 20–37). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • CEPEJ. (2010). European judicial systems – Edition 2010 (2008 data): Efficiency and quality of justice. CEPEJ Studies No. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEPEJ. (2012). Report evaluating European judicial systems – 2012 edition (2010 data). CEPEJ Studies No. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEPEJ. (2014). Report evaluating European judicial systems – 2014 edition (2012 data). CEPEJ Studies No. 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEPEJ. (2016). Thematic report: Use of information technology in European courts. CEPEJ Studies No. 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • e-CODEX. (2015). e-CODEX achievements, use cases and technical building blocks. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, F., & Cordella, A. (2016). Law and technology in civil judicial procedures. In Brownsword et al. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the law and regulation of technology(pp. 246–268). Oxford:Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, F., & Fabri, M. (Eds.). (2003). Judicial electronic data interchange in Europe: Applications, policies and trends. Bologna: Scarabeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, F., & Lanzara, G. F. (Eds.). (2009). ICT and innovation in the public sector: European studies in the making of e-government. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, F., & Lanzara, G. F. (Eds.). (2014). The circulation of agency in e-Justice: Interoperability and infrastructures for European transborder judicial proceedings. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, F., & Mohr, R. (2007). Reconciling independence and accountability in judicial systems. Utrecht Law Review, 3, 26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordella, A. (2007). E-government: Towards the e-bureaucratic form? Journal of Information Technology, 22(3), 265–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, J., Kalidien, S., & Choenni, S. (2016). Smart monitoring of the criminal justice system. Government Information Quarterly.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2014). Delivering the European advantage? How European governments can and should benefit from innovative public services. eGovernment Benchmark Final Background Report, May 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabri, M. (Ed.). (2007). Information and communication technology for the public prosecutor’s office. Bologna: Clueb.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabri, M. (2009). The Italian style of e-Justice in a comparative perspective. In A. Cerrillo & P. Fabra (Eds.), e-Justice. Using information communication technologies in the court system (pp. 1–19). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabri, M., & Contini, F. (Eds.). (2001). Justice and technology in Europe: How ICT is changing the judicial business. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francesconi, E., et al. (2011). D6.3 concept for implementation of WP6. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, K. (2004). Money claim online. cit. in Velicogna, M. 2011. Electronic access to justice: From theory to practice and back. Droit et cultures, 61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommik, L., & Klar, A. (2016). D4.11 WP4 Final Report. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hvillum, D. B., et al. (2016). D3.8 WP3 final report. e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikos, J. (2009). Institutional complexities and functional simplification. The case of money claims online. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), ICT and innovation in the public sector (pp. 66–87). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, S., & Bernoider, E. (2009). Aligning ICT and legal frameworks in a Austria’s e-bureaucracy: From mainframe to the Internet. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), ICT and innovation in the public sector (pp. 147–173). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, X. E. (2015). A European perspective on E-justice and new procedural models: Transforming the face of cross-border civil litigation and adjudication in the EU. Available at SSRN 2696978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, R. P., Fernando, P., & Gomes, C. (2017). From e-Justice to open judiciary: An analysis of the Portuguese experience. In C. E. Jiménez-Gómez & M. Gascó-Hernández (Eds.), Achieving open justice through citizen participation and transparency. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupo, G. (2011). The case of money claim online in England and Wales. Research Report IRSIG-CNR, Bologna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupo, G. (2014a). The case of money claim online and possession claim online in England and Wales. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), Building interoperability in European proceedings online. Bologna: Clueb.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupo, G. (2014b). Law, technology and system architectures: Critical design factors for money claim and possession claim online in England and Wales. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), The circulation of agency in e-Justice (pp. 83–107). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lupo, G., & Velicogna, M. (2017). Making EU justice smart? Looking into the implementation of new technologies to improve the efficiency of cross border justice services delivery. In M. P. R. Bolívar (Ed.), Smart technologies for smart governments. Transparency, efficiency and organizational issues (pp. 95–121). Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ontanu, A. (2016). How can the best practices of legal practitioners with judicial cooperation be operationalised to improve mutual trust?. From Common Rules to Best Practices in European Civil Procedure Conference, 25–26 February, Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oskamp, A., Lodder, A., & Apistola, M. (Eds.). (2004). IT Support of the Judiciary. The Hague: Asser Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiling, D. (2009). Technology for justice: How information technology can support judicial reform. Leiden: Leiden University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steigenga, E., & Velicogna, M. (2016). Envisioning the next step in e-Justice: In search of the key to provide easy access to cross border justice for all users. From common rules to best practices in European Civil Procedure Conference, 25 and 26 February 2016, Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2007). Justice systems and ICT, what can be learned from Europe? Utrecht Law Review, 3(1), 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2008). Use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in European judicial systems – CEPEJ Studies No. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2010). ICTs in the justice sector. In R. Coman & C. Dallara (Eds.), Handbook of judicial politics (pp. 195–236). Romania, Iasi: Institutul European.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2011). Electronic access to justice: From theory to practice and back. Droit et cultures, 61, 71–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2014). The making of Pan-European infrastructure: From the Schengen information system to the European arrest warrant. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), The circulation of agency in e-Justice: Interoperability and infrastructures for European transborder judicial proceedings. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M. (2015). e-CODEX and the Italian piloting experience. IRSIG-CNR Working Paper V. 1.0 Available at SSRN 2726515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., & Lupo, G. (2016). From drafting common rules to implementing electronic European civil procedures: The rise of e-CODEX. From common rules to best practices in European Civil Procedure conference, 25 and 26 February 2016, Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., & Steigenga E. (2016). Can complexity theory help understanding tomorrow e-justice?. Conference on Complex Systems, Law and Complexity session, 20 September 2016, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., Errera, A., & Derlange, S. (2011). e-Justice in France: The e-Barreau experience. Utrecht Law Review, 7(1), 163–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., Errera, A., & Derlange, S. (2013). Building e-Justice in continental Europe: The TéléRecours experience in France. Utrecht Law Review, 9(1), 38–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., et al. (2014). D7.4 architectural hands on material. e-CODEX Deliverables.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velicogna, M., et al. (2016). D7.6 architectural hands on material (Update of D7.4). e-CODEX Deliverable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xanthoulis, N. (2010). Introducing the concept of ‘E-justice’ in Europe: How adding an ‘E’ becomes a modern challenge for Greece and the EU. Effectius Communication.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Institute on Judicial Systems of the National Research Council of Italy (IRSIG-CNR), Bologna, Italy

    Marco Velicogna

Authors
  1. Marco Velicogna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Laura Alcaide Muñoz

  2. Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Velicogna, M. (2018). E-Justice in Europe: From National Experiences to EU Cross-Border Service Provision. In: Alcaide Muñoz, L., Rodríguez Bolívar, M. (eds) International E-Government Development . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63284-1_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation