Spelling suggestions: "subject:"collective redress"" "subject:"kollective redress""
1 |
Towards an effective class action model for European consumers : lessons learnt from IsraelFlavian, Ariel January 2012 (has links)
The class action is an important instrument for the enforcement of consumers' rights, particularly in personal actions for low sums known as Negative Expected Value (NEV) suits. Collective redress actions transform NEV suits into Positive Expected Value suits using economies of scale by the aggregation of smaller actions into a single legal action which is economically worthwhile pursuing. Collective redress promotes adherence to the law, deters illegal actions and furthers public interests. Collective redress also helps in the management of multiple cases in court. The introduction of a new class action model in Israel has proven to be very workable in the sense that it has improved access to justice, albeit that this system currently suffers from over-use, referred to in this work as the "flood problem". The purpose of this research is to introduce a class action model which brings with it the advantages of the Israeli model, as well as improvements upon it so as to promote consumer confidence in low figure transactions by individuals with large, powerful companies. The new model suggested in this work relies on the opt-out mechanism, monitored by regulatory bodies through public regulation or by private regulators. The reliance on the supremacy of public enforcement and follow-on actions over private stand-alone actions should make the system of collective redress more efficient than the current Israeli model, reducing the risk of a flood of actions whilst at the same time improving access to justice for large groups of claimants. Thus far, no unified European class action mechanism has been developed, and only some member states have developed their own systems. The model discussed in this work may be implemented as a unified set of rules in Europe, with some additional adjustments, such as those covering cross-border trade, to promote confidence in trade within the European Union.
|
2 |
Postavení nepřímých odběratelů ve sporech o náhradu škody způsobené porušením soutěžního práva / The status of indirect customers in lawsuits for compensation of loss caused by a breach of competition lawMoravová, Veronika January 2015 (has links)
Resumé The thesis elaborates on the indirect purchaser's standing in disputes for damages caused by a breach of competition law. Its main purpose is to describe and, consecutively, compare the American and European approach to private enforcement of competition law or, more specifically, selected aspects of regulation relating to indirect purchasers. It should be noted that while the roots of the American model of private enforcement date back to the 19th and 20th century, Europe started to pay increased attention to this topic in the 21st century. This fact obviously raises the question of whether and to what extent was the EU inspired by the American model in forming a European approach to private competition law enforcement. For years, this issue has not been regulated on the European level at all. Nevertheless, this changed with the adoption of a landmark Directive 2014/104/EU which shed new light on European conception of private enforcement of competition law. The thesis is divided into three chapters. The first chapter introduces the subject and aims to put the topic at hand into broader context. The private pillar of competition law enforcement, its advantages and disadvantages as well as its relation to the public pillar are described on a few pages. Subsequently, the history and current state of...
|
3 |
O mandado de segurança coletivo como instrumento de tutela coletiva / The class mandamus writ as an action for the protection of collective rights.Pinto, Marcos Vinícius 06 February 2015 (has links)
O presente estudo tem como objetivo discutir o mandado de segurança coletivo como verdadeira demanda a serviço da tutela processual de direitos coletivos em sentido amplo. Nesse sentido, as intenções principais residem em destacar o mandamus coletivo naquilo em que o distingue do mandado de segurança individual. Desse modo, são propositalmente lançados problemas que acentuam essas substanciais diferenças entre os dois institutos, o que passa pela discussão da natureza jurídica, dos direitos tutelados, da legitimidade, da coisa julgada, da litispendência, do procedimento (especialmente no tocante ao deferimento de liminares), da intervenção de terceiros e da desistência. É evidente que a construção do trabalho não prescinde da análise da Lei 12.016/2009, primeira lei a regulamentar o mandado de segurança coletivo cujo fundamento de validade, até então, se concentrava apenas na Constituição Federal (art. 5o, inc. LXX). Essa Lei trouxe várias disposições acerca do writ coletivo, fracassando, no entanto, em dialogar diversos de seus pontos com o microssistema de tutela coletiva. / The aim of this dissertation is to discuss the class mandamus writ as an action for the protection of collective rights. It seeks to underline the distinction between the individual and the class mandamus writ with a focus on the latter. In order to emphasize the substantial differences between the two institutes, particularly with regard to their nature, the rights they protect, res judicata, pendency, other procedural issues (particularly in relation to interim injunctions), joint of parties and quitclaim, the dissertation proposes questions related to these topics. It is clear that this dissertation cannot dispense with the analysis of Lei 12.016/2009, which was the first act to regulate the class mandamus writ. Until the enactment of that act, the class mandamus writ fundament of validity was exclusively the art. 5, LXX of the Federal Constitution. Although, this act has brought many provisions on the class mandamus writ, it failed in establishing a dialogue with the collective redress microsystem.
|
4 |
O mandado de segurança coletivo como instrumento de tutela coletiva / The class mandamus writ as an action for the protection of collective rights.Marcos Vinícius Pinto 06 February 2015 (has links)
O presente estudo tem como objetivo discutir o mandado de segurança coletivo como verdadeira demanda a serviço da tutela processual de direitos coletivos em sentido amplo. Nesse sentido, as intenções principais residem em destacar o mandamus coletivo naquilo em que o distingue do mandado de segurança individual. Desse modo, são propositalmente lançados problemas que acentuam essas substanciais diferenças entre os dois institutos, o que passa pela discussão da natureza jurídica, dos direitos tutelados, da legitimidade, da coisa julgada, da litispendência, do procedimento (especialmente no tocante ao deferimento de liminares), da intervenção de terceiros e da desistência. É evidente que a construção do trabalho não prescinde da análise da Lei 12.016/2009, primeira lei a regulamentar o mandado de segurança coletivo cujo fundamento de validade, até então, se concentrava apenas na Constituição Federal (art. 5o, inc. LXX). Essa Lei trouxe várias disposições acerca do writ coletivo, fracassando, no entanto, em dialogar diversos de seus pontos com o microssistema de tutela coletiva. / The aim of this dissertation is to discuss the class mandamus writ as an action for the protection of collective rights. It seeks to underline the distinction between the individual and the class mandamus writ with a focus on the latter. In order to emphasize the substantial differences between the two institutes, particularly with regard to their nature, the rights they protect, res judicata, pendency, other procedural issues (particularly in relation to interim injunctions), joint of parties and quitclaim, the dissertation proposes questions related to these topics. It is clear that this dissertation cannot dispense with the analysis of Lei 12.016/2009, which was the first act to regulate the class mandamus writ. Until the enactment of that act, the class mandamus writ fundament of validity was exclusively the art. 5, LXX of the Federal Constitution. Although, this act has brought many provisions on the class mandamus writ, it failed in establishing a dialogue with the collective redress microsystem.
|
5 |
Den svenska grupprättegångslagstiftningen — Ett tidigt och outvecklat exemplar? : Analys av den svenska lagstiftningen i ljuset av den europeiska utvecklingen / The Swedish Class Action Regime — An Early and Undeveloped Example? : Analysis of the Swedish Legislation in the Light of the European DevelopmentWitt-Strömer, Henrik January 2020 (has links)
The Swedish procedural legislation on class actions before general courts, GrL, was when coming into force in January 2003 the first generally applicable class action regime of continental Europe. However, it seems, it was never used in any notable extent. In this thesis I have analysed GrL, it’s potential flaws, how it could be affected by the ongoing EU legislative procedure of establishing a directive regarding representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and what the Swedish legislator could potentially learn from the Dutch model being primarily based on a regime of mass settlements. The ongoing EU legislative procedure will by all accounts result in a directive requiring Swedish class action regime to be adjusted with a few minor modifications, primarily the introduction of a certification procedure of entities to allow these to initiate representative actions in disputes concerning the protection of consumers’ collective interests. Apart from adjustments of Swedish class action legislation in order to harmonise it with the directive, I have argued for several additional adjustments of proceedings under GrL in order to make it in an increased degree correspond with the reasons by which the legislation was motivated, and in order to in general function in a more effective manner. For that purpose, I have argued that the opt in mechanism should be replaced with an opt out mechanism, or that opt out should at least be introduced as a supplementing option to an opt in main rule. Independently of the issue of whether an opt in or an opt out mechanism should be used to constitute the represented group, I have furthermore argued that the mechanism used should allow group members to leave the group during the proceedings. Finally, I have argued that the courts should be encouraged to use a for the Swedish legal system untypically active direction of proceedings in class actions specifically.
|
6 |
La tutela giudiziale e stragiudiziale del consumatore nel diritto dell’Unione europea / La protection judiciaire et extrajudiciaire du consommateur dans le droit de l’Union Européenne / The judicial and the extra-judicial consumer protection in the EU LawTramarin, Sara 13 June 2017 (has links)
Le travail réalisé a pris en considération en premier lieu le droit international privé de l'UE, puis des aspects plus à proprement parler de « droit international procédural », en se concrétisant par une « systémisation » et une cartographie des voies de recours proposées au consommateur par le droit européen pour les litiges transfrontaliers. La première partie, concernant la loi applicable aux contrats internationaux du consommateur et le tribunal compétent dans le droit international privé de l'Union européenne, permit d'identifier les problématiques de droit international privé sous-jacentes aux contrats et aux litiges internationaux en matière de consommation, qui sont exacerbées dans le domaine du commerce électronique. La thèse traite deuxièmement la protection du consommateur par l'assouplissement et la simplification des procédures ordinaires et la protection du consommateur par des procédures collectives transfrontalières. Enfin, la thèse concerne la protection du consommateur par les procédures alternatives au contentieux ordinaire. / The thesis analyzes, under various aspects related to private international law and international civil procedure of the European Union, the status of the protection offered to the European consumers in their international contracts, in particular in relation to the objectives and in the context of the single market. The thesis is divided into three chapters. The first chapter deals with consumer protection in the international private law of European Union (regulation (UE) 1215/2012 and regulation (CE) 593/2008). The second chapter deals with the protection offered to consumers by european international civil procedure with reference to individual and collective litigations. The third chapter deals with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and with on-line dispute resolution (ODR) and analyzes EU directive 2013/11/UE and regulation (EU) 524/2013. / La tesi analizza, sotto vari aspetti relativi al diritto internazionale privato e processuale dell’Unione Europea, lo stato della protezione offerta al consumatore europeo nei contratti e nelle controversie internazionali, con uno specifico riguardo alle tutele di carattere processuale e giurisdizionale. La tesi si articola in tre capitoli, che investono gli ambiti in cui tale tutela può esplicarsi, ovvero, l’individuazione di un foro e di una legge applicabile favorevoli agli interessi del consumatore, la semplificazione delle regole di procedura nelle controversie individuali internazionali, la possibilità di dare luogo a procedimenti transfrontalieri collettivi e la creazione di un sistema efficace di risoluzione delle controversie internazionali in via stragiudiziale anche on-line. Il primo capitolo ricostruisce dapprima il sistema di diritto internazionale privatodell'Unione europea in materia di contratti di consumo, dando conto del contesto politico ed economico in cui si inserisce ed alla cui luce devono esserne letti gli obiettivi. Vengono quindi individuati i principi e gli obiettivi che fondano le norme di diritto internazionale privato in materia di contratti internazionali del consumatore, le quali si caratterizzano per l’essere ispirate a finalità materiali, ovvero, volte a permettere di individuare un foro competente ed una legge applicabile che siano in grado di bilanciare tra loro le esigenze dei consumatori e degli operatori del mercato, con la conseguenza di favorire l’esplicarsi degli scambi commerciali e della concorrenza nel mercato unico. Ciò avviene garantendo al consumatore l’applicazione della legge e la competenza del foro a lui più prossimi, ovvero quelli del suo paese di residenza abituale (la cui coincidenza permette peraltro una riduzione dei costi delle liti transfrontaliere) e la prevedibilità delle soluzioni agli operatori del mercato.Il capitolo traccia quindi lo sviluppo normativo e giurisprudenziale delle norme di diritto internazionale privato europee in materia di contratti del consumatore, prendendo in particolare in considerazione le più recenti sentenze della Corte di Giustizia che, dal 2010 ad oggi, hanno ridefinito l’ambito di applicazione delle norme contenute nel regolamento (CE) 44/2001 (Bruxelles I), oggi rifuso nel regolamento (UE) 1215/2012 (Bruxelles I-bis), e nel regolamento (CE) 593/2008 (Roma I), insistendo sulla definizione del concetto, volutamente aleatorio, di “attività diretta” e sul suo ruolo di preminenza nel connettere la fattispecie contrattuale allo Stato della residenza del consumatore per permetterne la competenza dei giudici e l’applicabilità della relativa legge. Viene svolta infine una analisi critica sull’interpretazione fornita dalla Corte di Giustizia che rischia, nel concreto, di rendere le norme in oggetto applicabili in maniera variabile dai giudici nazionali, garantendo alle volte una tutela troppo estesa o troppo ristretta al consumatore, senza riguardo per l’esigenza di certezza giuridica degli operatori del mercato.
|
7 |
Le contentieux privé des pratiques anticoncurrentielles : Étude des contentieux privés autonome et complémentaire devant les juridictions judiciaires / Private litigation of competition law (cartels and abuses of dominance) : Study of stand alone and follow-on litigations in national courtsAmaro, Rafael 05 December 2012 (has links)
L’actualisation des données sur le contentieux privé des pratiques anticoncurrentielles fait naître laconviction que l’état de sous-développement souvent pointé est aujourd’hui dépassé. Les statistiquessont nettes : des dizaines d’affaires sont plaidées chaque année. Toutefois, ce contentieux s’esquissesous des traits qui ne sont pas exactement ceux du contentieux indemnitaire de masse faisant suite àla commission d’ententes internationales. C’est un fait majeur qui doit être noté car l’essentiel desprojets de réforme furent bâtis sur cet idéal type. Trois des caractères les plus saillants de la réalitéjudiciaire témoignent de cette fracture entre droit positif et droit prospectif. D’abord, le contentieuxprivé est majoritairement un contentieux contractuel entre professionnels aux forces déséquilibrées. Ensuite, c’estun contentieux national – voire local – plus qu’un contentieux international. Enfin, c’est plutôt uncontentieux autonome se déployant devant les juridictions judiciaires sans procédure préalable oupostérieure des autorités de concurrence (stand alone). Paradoxalement, les actions complémentaires(follow-on), pourtant réputées d’une mise en oeuvre aisée, sont plus rares. Ces observations invitentalors à réviser l’ordre des priorités de toute réflexion prospective. Ainsi, la lutte contre l’asymétried’informations et de moyens entre litigants, l’essor de sanctions contractuelles efficaces, larecomposition du rôle des autorités juridictionnelles et administratives dans le procès civil ou encorele développement des procédures de référé s’imposent avec urgence. Mais s’il paraît légitime desoutenir ce contentieux autonome déjà existant, il n’en reste pas moins utile de participer à laréflexion déjà amorcée pour développer le contentieux indemnitaire de masse tant attendu et dont onne peut négliger les atouts. De lege ferenda, le contentieux privé de demain présenterait donc uncaractère bicéphale ; il serait à la fois autonome et complémentaire. Il faut alors tenter de concevoir unrégime efficace pour ces deux moutures du contentieux privé en tenant compte de leurs exigencesrespectives. Or l’analyse positive et prospective de leurs fonctions révèlent que contentieuxautonome et contentieux complémentaire s’illustrent autant par les fonctions qu’ils partagent que parcelles qui les distinguent. Il serait donc excessif de vouloir en tous points leur faire application derègles particulières ou, à l’inverse, de règles identiques. C’est donc vers l’élaboration d’un régime commun complété par un régime particulier à chacun d’eux que s’orientera la présente recherche.PREMIÈRE PARTIE. Le régime commun aux contentieux privés autonome et complémentaireSECONDE PARTIE. Le régime particulier à chacun des contentieux privés autonome et complémentaire / Pas de résumé en anglais
|
Page generated in 0.456 seconds