> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://novacont.gitbook.io/nova-docs/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://novacont.gitbook.io/nova-docs/decentralized-jury-system/voting-case-resolution.md). # Voting & Case Resolution Once a case is assigned to three jurors, the active deliberation phase begins. This page explains how jurors evaluate cases, how votes are cast, how verdicts are determined, and what happens when the process does not go as expected.
### The Voting Window From the moment jurors are assigned, a **48-hour voting window** opens. Each juror must cast their vote independently within this window. There is no communication channel between jurors — deliberation is intentionally isolated to prevent coordination, collusion, and social pressure from influencing individual decisions. Jurors evaluate the case based solely on the materials available on-chain: * The original contract terms; title, description, agreed price, and deadlines * The provider's evidence URI submitted at delivery * The dispute reason URI submitted by the initiating party * The respondent's reason URI if submitted No additional information is considered. If a party failed to submit clear and accessible evidence at the appropriate stage, that absence of evidence is itself part of what jurors evaluate. ### Voting Options Each juror has exactly three options when casting their vote: **Client Wins** The provider failed to meet the agreed terms. The client is entitled to a full refund. The provider receives nothing from the agreed base price. **Equal Split** The evidence does not clearly favor either party, or both parties share responsibility for the breakdown. The agreed base price is divided equally between the two parties. **Provider Wins** The delivery meets the agreed terms and the dispute is unfounded. The provider receives the full agreed base price minus the platform fee. The client receives any applicable surplus from their deposit. > Jurors are not asked to assign blame or make moral judgments. The sole question is whether the delivered work meets the terms defined in the contract. Vote based on the evidence, not on sympathy or assumption. ### How the Verdict Is Determined The verdict is determined by majority. With three jurors, a majority requires at least two votes for the same option. **Early resolution:** If two jurors vote for the same option before the 48-hour window closes, a majority is reached and the verdict is finalized immediately. The third juror's vote is no longer required and the case proceeds to execution without waiting for the full window to expire. **Tie handling:** A tie occurs when all three jurors vote differently (one for each option) or when no majority is reached by the end of the voting window. In this case, the verdict defaults to an **equal split**. This is a deliberate design choice: when the evidence is genuinely ambiguous and jurors cannot agree, splitting the funds equally is the most neutral and fair outcome available. > There is no mechanism for jurors to discuss, negotiate, or change their votes after submission. Each vote is final the moment it is confirmed on-chain. ### Juror Replacement If a juror fails to cast their vote within the first **24 hours** of the voting window, they become eligible for replacement. This replacement mechanism exists to prevent cases from stalling due to inactive or unresponsive jurors. **How replacement works:** * After 24 hours of inactivity, any external participant can trigger the replacement of the inactive juror * The inactive juror is removed from the case, their stake is partially slashed, and a warning is added to their profile * A new juror is randomly selected from the pool and assigned to the case * The voting deadline is extended by an additional **24 hours** to give the replacement juror adequate time to review and vote Replacement can only occur once per juror slot. If the replacement juror also fails to vote, the case proceeds to resolution with the votes already cast. A tie-breaking default applies if needed. ### Default Win — Counter Party No-Show Before jurors are even assigned, there is a prior step: the counter party must pay their share of the dispute fee within a **3-day response window**. If the counter party fails to pay within this window, the case never reaches the jury. Instead, a **default win** is automatically granted to the initiating party. The smart contract executes this outcome without any jury involvement. No votes are cast, no jurors are assigned, and no deliberation takes place. This mechanism exists to prevent a simple stalling tactic: refusing to engage with a dispute in order to delay resolution indefinitely. ### Verdict Execution Once a majority verdict is reached either through normal voting, early resolution, or tie-breaking default the verdict is passed back to the NovaCont smart contract for execution. The smart contract calculates the exact fund distribution based on the verdict: * **Client Wins** → Full deposit returned to client. Provider receives nothing. * **Equal Split** → Agreed base price divided equally. Platform fee deducted from provider's share. Any extra deposit surplus returned to client. * **Provider Wins** → Full agreed base price minus platform fee released to provider. Any extra deposit surplus returned to client. Funds are credited to each party's pending withdrawal balance immediately upon execution. Both parties can then withdraw their allocated amounts from the dashboard at any time. The contract transitions permanently to **Resolved** state. No appeals, modifications, or reversals are possible after this point. ### What Jurors Should Know Before Voting **Read everything before voting.** Once your vote is submitted on-chain it cannot be changed. Take the full time available if you need it. Early resolution only triggers when a majority already exists, so a thoughtful late vote is always better than a hasty early one. **Stick to the contract terms.** Your job is not to determine who is a better person or who seems more trustworthy. Your job is to determine whether the delivered work meets the description in the contract. If it does, the provider wins. If it clearly does not, the client wins. If the evidence is genuinely unclear, split equally. **Inaccessible evidence counts against the submitting party.** If the provider's evidence link is broken, expired, or leads to an empty file, treat it as though no evidence was submitted. The same applies to the dispute reason URI. Both parties are responsible for ensuring their evidence remains accessible throughout the case. **Your vote is anonymous to other jurors but recorded on-chain.** Other jurors cannot see your vote during the voting window. However, all votes are permanently recorded on the blockchain and are publicly verifiable after the case is resolved.