Download Free Us Style Class Actions In Europe Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Us Style Class Actions In Europe and write the review.

Not so long ago, class actions were considered to be a textbook example of American exceptionalism; many of their main features were assumed to be incompatible with the culture of the civil law world. However, the tide is changing; while there are now trends in the USA toward limiting or excluding class actions, notorious cases like Dieselgate are moving more and more European jurisdictions to extend the reach of their judicial collective redress mechanisms. For many new fans of class actions, collective redress has become a Holy Grail of sorts, a miraculous tool that will rejuvenate national systems of civil justice and grant them unprecedented power. Still, while the introduction of various forms of representative action has virtually become a fashion, it is anything but certain that attempting to transplant American-style class action will be successful. European judicial structures and legal culture(s) are fundamentally different, which poses a considerable challenge. This book investigates whether class actions in Europe are indeed a Holy Grail or just another wrong turn in the continuing pursuit of just and effective means of protecting the rights of citizens and businesses. It presents both positive and critical perspectives, supplemented by case studies on the latest collectivization trends in Europe’s national civil justice systems. The book also shares the experiences of some non-European jurisdictions that have developed promising hybrid forms of collective redress, such as Canada, Brazil, China, and South Africa. In closing, a selection of topical international cases that raise interesting issues regarding the effectiveness of class actions in an international context are studied and discussed.
This open access book offers an analytical presentation of how Europe has created its own version of collective actions. In the last three decades, Europe has seen a remarkable proliferation of collective action legislation, making class actions the most successful export product of the American legal scholarship. While its spread has been surrounded by distrust and suspiciousness, today more than half of the EU Member States have introduced collective actions for damages and from those who did, more than half chose, to some extent, the opt-out system.This book demonstrates why collective actions have been felt needed from the perspective of access to justice and effectiveness of law, the European debate and the deep layers of the European reaction and resistance, revealing how the Copernican turn of class actions questions the fundamentals of the European thinking about market and public interest. Using a transsystemic presentation of the European national models, it analyzes the way collective actions were accommodated with the European regulatory environment, the novel and peculiar regulatory questions they had to address and how and why they work differently on this side of the Atlantic.
Despite western Europe's traditional disdain for the United States' "adversarial legalism," the European Union is shifting toward a very similar approach to the law, according to Daniel Kelemen. Coining the term "eurolegalism" to describe the hybrid that is now developing in Europe, he shows how the political and organizational realities of the EU make this shift inevitable. The model of regulatory law that had long predominated in western Europe was more informal and cooperative than its American counterpart. It relied less on lawyers, courts, and private enforcement, and more on opaque networks of bureaucrats and other interests that developed and implemented regulatory policies in concert. European regulators chose flexible, informal means of achieving their objectives, and counted on the courts to challenge their decisions only rarely. Regulation through litigation-central to the U.S. model-was largely absent in Europe. But that changed with the advent of the European Union. Kelemen argues that the EU's fragmented institutional structure and the priority it has put on market integration have generated political incentives and functional pressures that have moved EU policymakers to enact detailed, transparent, judicially enforceable rules-often framed as "rights"-and back them with public enforcement litigation as well as enhanced opportunities for private litigation by individuals, interest groups, and firms.
This groundbreaking volume of The ANNALS provides the first overview of class action laws and related mechanisms around the world. It features 30 "country reports" by leading scholars, describing the adoption, characteristics and consequences to date of class action and non-class group litigation procedures ranging across North and Latin America, Australia, Asia and Europe. In December 2007, Stanford Law School and the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies organized an international conference that studied the global spread of class actions and group litigation procedures. Scholars, jurists, and practitioners from around the world gathered to discuss and debate the use of group litigation procedures and initiate a research project on the evolution of class actions and aggregate litigation worldwide. This volume of The ANNALS is one result of that conference. Students, scholars and policymakers will find this anthology of reports to be an essential overview, providing a solid understanding of the effects of class actions around the globe.
Raising a series of questions on resolving mass disputes, and fuelling future debate, this book will provide a challenging and thought-provoking read for law academics, practitioners and policy-makers.
In recent years collective litigation procedures have spread across the globe, accompanied by hot controversy and normative debate. Yet virtually nothing is known about how these procedures operate in practice. Based on extensive documentary and interview research, this volume presents the results of the first comparative investigation of class actions and group litigation 'in action'. Produced by a multinational team of legal scholars, this book spans research from ten different countries in the Americas, Europe, Asia and the Middle East, including common law and civil law jurisdictions. The contributors conclude that to understand how class actions work in practice, one needs to know the cultural factors that shape claiming, the financial arrangements that enable or impede litigation, and how political actors react when mass claims erupt. Substantive law and procedural rules matter, but culture, economics and politics matter at least as much. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of law, business and politics. It will also be of use to public policy makers looking to respond to mass claims; financial analysts looking to understanding the potential impact of new legal instruments; and global lawyers who litigate transnationally. Contributors:A. Barroilhet, C. Cameron, N. Creutzfeldt, M.A. Gómez, A. Halfmeier, D.R. Hensler, C. Hodges, K.-C. Huang, J. Kalajdzic, A. Klement, B. Stier, E. Thornburg, I. Tzankova, S. Voet
Class action lawsuits--allowing one or a few plaintiffs to represent many who seek redress--have long been controversial. The current controversy, centered on lawsuits for money damages, is characterized by sharp disagreement among stakeholders about the kinds of suits being filed, whether plaintiffs' claims are meritorious, and whether resolutions to class actions are fair or socially desirable. Ultimately, these concerns lead many to wonder, Are class actions worth their costs to society and to business? Do they do more harm than good? To describe the landscape of current damage class action litigation, elucidate problems, and identify solutions, the RAND Institute for Civil Justice conducted a study using qualitative and quantitative research methods. The researchers concluded that the controversy over damage class actions has proven intractable because it implicates deeply held but sharply contested ideological views among stakeholders. Nevertheless, many of the political antagonists agree that class action practices merit improvement. The authors argue that both practices and outcomes could be substantially improved if more judges would supervise class action litigation more actively and scrutinize proposed settlements and fee awards more carefully. Educating and empowering judges to take more responsibility for case outcomes--and ensuring that they have the resources to do so--can help the civil justice system achieve a better balance between the public goals of class actions and the private interests that drive them.