English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This work is licensed under CC BY 4.0 The COVID-19 pandemic has put the global justice system under pressure and strain. Malaysia is among the countries that have been fundamentally strived to enhance access to justice for the disputing parties through traditional arbitration during the chaos of COVID-19. For instance, several well-known arbitration centres allow the conduct of oral hearings electronically besides other arbitral proceedings. By using legal research methodology, this article endeavours to examine whether e-arbitration can provide a suitable response for the “new normal” phenomenon during the COVID-19 pandemic. The collected data is then analytically and critically analysed using the content analysis method. This article finds that there are legal ambiguity and logistical challenges regarding the use of technologies for the purpose of oral hearing. Also, there is an urgent need to ensure that the right to equal treatment will not be compromised during e-hearing. Furthermore, the Malaysian authorities should examine the possibility of implanting e-arbitration on a full scale, since the role of electronic communication technologies in e-arbitration is fundamental rather than limited and restricted on facilitating the process of resolution as applied in traditional arbitration. Finally, this humble article provides several recommendations to enhance access to justice during and after the era of the COVID-19 pandemic because “Justice delayed is justice denied”.

DOES E-ARBITRATION PROVIDE A SUITABLE RESPONSE FOR THE “NEW NORMAL” PHENOMENON DURING THE ERA OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC?