Traditional litigation in courts and dispute resolution under arbitration rules represent two distinct mechanisms for resolving conflicts, especially significant in the context of e-commerce and cyberspace where disputes often cross jurisdictions and require efficient handling. The differences between them can be understood across several dimensions such as procedure, flexibility, cost, enforceability, confidentiality, and technological adaptability. Traditional litigation refers to the formal process of resolving disputes through courts established by the state. It is governed by procedural laws, statutes, and rigid rules of evidence. In contrast, arbitration is a private dispute resolution mechanism where parties agree to submit their dispute to one or more arbitrators, whose decision is binding. Arbitration operates under agreed rules, such as institutional arbitration rules or ad hoc procedures, which are generally more flexible. One of the primary distinctions lies in the level of formality and procedural rigidity. Court litigation follows strict procedural codes, including pleadings, evidence, and appeals, which often make the process lengthy. Arbitration, on the other hand, allows parties to design procedures suited to their needs, enabling faster resolution. In e-commerce disputes, where time sensitivity is crucial, arbitration is often preferred due to its efficiency. Another key difference is jurisdiction. Traditional courts are bound by territorial jurisdiction, which