⚖️Judiciary

Jur is building a composable protocol to orchestrate a dispute resolution on-chain. The vision is to create flexible modules to allow organizations to easily build the most appropriate dispute resolution or judiciary system for their particular needs.

A Society focused on gaming will have different needs from a society that has a physical presence and needs a machine to resolve disputes relating to real estate.

Jur's judicial stack includes a modular protocol of dispute resolution mechanisms.

As in the original scope of the project, the stack will offer different types of solutions, potentially linked together. That is, for a case one tool can be used initially, and if a solution is not reached or one party appeals, another tool may be used. Each level of appeal exposes parties to higher costs but higher resolution quality and value. Parties can agree to waive appeal rights to reduce costs.

There are two main categories of dispute resolution:

• Legally binding: means that they are enforceable in one or more physical jurisdictions

• On-chain (not legally binding): They are enforceable on-chain but have no legal validity in an existing physical jurisdiction.

With a Sovereign Network State a decision can technically be said to be legally binding. The dispute resolution levels are:

• AI-driven: dispute resolution solutions where software and AI produce a form of dispute evaluation.

• Mediation: a qualified third party invites the two parties to reach an amicable agreement

• Adjudication: A simplified form of adjudication by a third party, usually not legally binding.

• Arbitration: A legally binding form in which a private judge (arbitrator) makes a legally binding judgment.

They are preceded by techniques and solutions aimed at preventing disputes.