The study focuses on the potential for improving processes of settling disputes over temporary measures, which revolve around how the execution proceeds are allocated and disputes over substantive aspects of legality of the execution process. It focuses on how digitalization and AI-based technologies can improve the speed and precision of the adjudication of such disputes, eliminating delay and fostering transparency. It focuses mostly on the role of the presiding judge in temporary disputes and defining its legitimacy to tackle substantive disputes. Digital platforms allow real-time filing of disputes and notifications to the parties, with automation in managing procedural reviews and less inefficiency in the approach to the execution phase itself. The paper ends by suggesting legal reforms in Jordan, which calls for a full digital framework regarding execution disputes. Among them is standard e-templates for filing that have preset deadlines, so they can be automated to hasten the process, together with an automated tracking system. Besides, an option for digital payment systems can be filtered against the shadows of frivolous disputes because of filing charges and unwarranted delays. Last-minute opposition can only be admissible if there is such an AI system to ascertain whether there is a reason for a disruption or not. The paper concludes by underlining how the modern legal world aspects can be made speedier, fairer, and more accurate through executions drawing lessons from legal circles in Egypt and Syria.