Logo



Download the full methodology

What is the methodology behind the assessment?

The assessment was conducted by employing a Maturity Level Assessment Tool (MLAT), which uses both quantitative and qualitative data to establish the degree to which a jurisdiction may be prepared to transition to fully digital processes but also the types of court procedures which have the highest level of maturity in this respect and are thus the most suitable for testing innovative practices, including the introduction of online courts.

How is this different form other assessment tools?  

The assessment of levels of readiness through MLAT does not intend to provide a ranking for the evaluated jurisdiction or compare and contrast it against an international standard. It is intended to provide guidance on future steps on the path towards introducing online courts, rather than focus on ranking or on status quo.

What does MLAT consist of?

MLAT covers four key areas. In turn, each of these areas consist of several indicators and sub-indicators.

  1.  Policies and Infrastructure for e-Justice

    1. Level of development of e-governance and e-infrastructure

    2. Level of development of justice system digitalisation

    3. Digitalisation of court processes

    4. Stakeholder engagement

  2. Commercial Dispute Resolution

    1. Level of specialisation of commercial dispute resolution

    2. Use of mediation/alternative dispute resolution (ADR) tools

    3. Efficiency and effectiveness of commercial litigation

  3. Uncontested Procedures for Enforcing a Claim

    1. Ease of filing

    2. Efficient processing

    3. Effective connections between the uncontested procedure and the procedure following a statement of opposition

  4. Small Claims Procedure

    1. Ease of filing

    2. Availability of meaningful procedural simplifications of the small claims procedure

What is the scoring used for MLAT?

The MLAT is defined in a manner that allows for numerical scoring of the level of readiness of targeted jurisdictions. As described above, the four Dimensions consist of several indicators. Each indicator, in turn, is divided into several subindicators. The sub-indicators are evaluated on a 1 to 3 scale, based on pre-defined scoring criteria. On the 1 to 3 scale, a score of 1 is considered negative, a score of 2 - neutral, and a score of 3 - positive.