Short Reads

The Growth of Collective Redress in the EU: A Survey of Developments in 10 Member States—the need to maintain safeguards

The Growth of Collective Redress in the EU: A Survey of Developments in 10 Member States—the need to maintain safeguards

30.05.2017 EU law

In 2013, the European Commission adopted a Recommendation on Collective Redress. It invited Member States to adopt a collective redress framework by July 2016 that would include the features mentioned in the Recommendation and then by July 2017, to report to the Commission about the extent to which they had done so. On the basis of the Member States’ report, the Commission will assess whether further actions by the EU is required.

After some years of hesitation by national legislatures, it is now clear that collective redress or so-called class-action models are multiplying across the EU. A large majority of the Member States now have at least one way for claimants to combine their claims and sue an alleged harm-causing party or parties for damages before national courts.

Though collective redress presents advantages (mainly the potential time and cost efficiency of dealing with multiple, similar claims at the same time), such mechanism is not without risks. In particular, experience in non-EU jurisdictions has shown that the opportunity to aggregate claims can in some cases cause litigation abuse. This potential for abuse is more potent where the rewards of litigation far outweigh the risks meaning that there are significant financial incentives for filing weak (or even entirely meritless) claims.

The Commission’s 2013 Recommendation acknowledged this risk and proposed several safeguards that are intended to prevent abusive litigation by keeping the risks and rewards under control.

It is particularly appropriate to determine whether safeguards have been adopted at all, and whether and how those safeguards are being implemented in practice.

Against this background, the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) has ordered a survey on the “state of play” of collective redress in 10 Member States (including all of the largest economies). The survey was coordinated by Sidley Austin LLP in Brussels. It called on the expertise of practitioners in all of the Member States surveyed, including Stibbe Amsterdam (Jeroen Kortmann) for the Netherlands and Stibbe Brussels (Oliver Stevens) for Belgium[1]. The survey identifies trends and issues that seem to be emerging across the EU. It finds that Member States have been accelerating the introduction of policies that simplify lawsuits, with the value and volume of claims increasing steeply. However, ILR’s study also finds that Member States, depending on the Member State in question, have failed to a larger or lesser extent to implement or maintain important safeguards for collective redress.

To view the PDF version of the survey, please click here.

 

Footnotes:

[1] Stibbe has not contributed to the editing of the report

Team

Related news

22.09.2017 NL law
Dutch Supreme Court ruled on the time limit under which appeals must be brought

Short Reads - On 1 September 2017, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that the appeal period ends three months after the day on which the court has given its judgment, at the end of the day with the same number as the day on which the judgment was given (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2225). However, when the appeal period of three months expires in a month that does not have a day with the same number due to the fact that it is shorter, the appeal period ends on the final day of that month. Therefore, it is important to be aware that the appeal period relating to judgments given on certain specific days might end earlier than expected.

Read more

22.08.2017 NL law
AkzoNobel v. Elliott: viewpoints for target company conduct in hostile takeover situations

Short Reads - Stibbe represents AkzoNobel's supervisory board in litigation brought by AkzoNobel's activist shareholder Elliot in relation to unsolicited takeover proposals from PPG Industries. In a landmark case on the matter, the Dutch Enterprise Chamber has given important pointers on board conduct in hostile takeover situations.

Read more

02.08.2017 NL law
Termination of continuing performance contracts: a new chapter

Short Reads - On July 7th 2017, the Dutch Supreme Court added a new chapter to the case law it has developed over the years regarding the termination of continuing performance contracts, making a specific exception for publishing agreements regarding copyrighted works (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:1270).

Read more

14.09.2017 NL law
Wetsvoorstel aanvullende maatregelen accountantsorganisaties – aangenomen door de Tweede Kamer

Short Reads - In onze Alert van 20 juli 2017 hebben wij aandacht besteed aan het op 17 februari 2017 ingediende wetsvoorstel aanvullende maatregelen accountantsorganisaties ("Wetsvoorstel"). Met de in het Wetsvoorstel voorgestelde maatregelen is beoogd de kwaliteit van wettelijke controles te verbeteren.

Read more

Our website uses cookies: third party analytics cookies to best adapt our website to your needs & cookies to enable social media functionalities. For more information on the use of cookies, please check our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Please note that you can change your cookie opt-ins at any time via your browser settings.

Privacy and Cookie Policy