Collective Actions in the European Union—American or European Model?

Verica Trstenjak^1,2, Petra Weingerl^3*

¹Faculty of Law, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
³Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

DOI: 10.4236/blr.2014.53015                

Abstract

Collective redress is a procedural mechanism that allows for reasons of procedural economy and efficiency of enforcement many similar legal claims to be combined into a single court action. Consumers and investors encounter problems with the enforcement of their rights through the individual redress, especially in times of the financial crisis. If a substantial number of harmed individuals decide not to pursue their, usually low, claims, the unduly gained profits of the opposite party can be extremely high. Thus, collective redress mechanisms can represent better option for consumers and investors, as their claims tend to be much less burdensome in case of the collective action. However, such mechanisms can trigger the abuse of the procedures, with the most commonly quoted threat being the example of American regulation of class actions. Negative characteristics of American model are the reasons that EU decided to shape its own concept of collective redress mechanisms. The binding act in this field in the EU is directive on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests; however, there is no binding act yet regarding compensatory actions. In June 2013, the European Commission published the Recommendation on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning violations of rights granted under Union Law. It is not binding on Member States, however, it can serve as a guideline to improve their existing legislations, especially the regulation of collective compensatory actions. In so doing, consumers and investors might be given the possibility to use more efficient mechanism to compensate the harm suffered.

Keywords

Access to Justice, Collective Redress Mechanisms, Injunctive Relief, Compensatory Relief, Consumers, Investors, Opt-In, Opt-Out, The European Commission’s Recommendation

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Benohr, I. (2013a). Consumer Dispute Resolution after the Lisbon Treaty: Collective Actions and Alternative Procedures. Journal of Consumer Policy, 36, 87-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10603-012-9202-0
[2]	Benohr, I. (2013b). EU Consumer Law and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199651979.001.0001
[3]	Cafaggi, F., & Micklitz, H.-W. (2009). New Frontiers of Consumer Protection: The Interplay between Private and Public Enforcement. Mortsel: Intersentia.
[4]	Hodges, C. (2010). Collective Redress in Europe: The New Model. Civil Justice Quarterly, 370-395.
[5]	Kortmann, J., & Bredenoord-Spoek, M. (2011). The Netherlands: A Hotspot for Class Actions? Global Competition Litigation Review, 4, 13.
[6]	Micklitz, H.-W., & Stadler, A. (2006). The Development of Collective Legal Actions in Europe, Especially in German Civil Procedure. European Business Law Review, 5, 1473-1503.
[7]	Muhleron, R. (2009). The Case for an Opt-Out Class Action for European Member States: A Legal and Empirical Analysis. Columbia Journal of European Law, 15, 409-454.
[8]	Sorabji, J., Napier, M., & Musgrove, R. (2014). Developing a More Efficient and Effective Procedure for Collective Actions, Final Report, a Series of Recommendations to the Lord Chancellor. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/judicial-institute/files/Improving_Access_to_Justice_ through_Collective_Actions_-_final_report.pdf
[9]	Trstenjak, V. (2013). Procedural Aspects of European Consumer Protection Law and the Case Law of the CJEU from the Perspective of Insurance Law. European Review of Private Law, 2, 451-478.
[10]	Trstenjak, V. (2013). The Protection of the Consumer in the Financial Products Market. In European Jurists’ Forum 2013. Barcelona.
[11]	Tzakas, L. D.-P. (2011). Effective Collective Redress in Antitrust and Consumer Protection Matters: A Panacea or a Chimera? Common Market Law Review, 48, 1125-1174.
[12]	van Boom, W. H. (2009). Collective Settlement of Mass Claims in the Netherlands. In M. Casper, A. Janssen, P. Pohlmann, & R. Schulze (Eds.), Auf dem Weg zu einer europaischen Sammelklage (pp. 171-192)? München: Sellier.
[13]	Van der Bergh, R. (2013). Private Enforcement of European Competition Law and the Persisting Collective Action Problem. Maastricht Journal, 20, 12-34.
[14]	van der Heijden, M.-J. (2010). Class Actions/Les Action Collectives. Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, 14.3. http://www.ejcl.org/143/art143-18.pdf