유럽에서의 소비자 집단구제제도의 동향과 미래
European Approach to Consumer Collective Redress
0
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Recently, consumer collective redress mechanisms have been discussed and developed institutionally in Europe – many European countries have adopted verbandsklage or class actions. Some European countries, however, do not institutionalize collective redress systems yet. In addition, judicial systems and regulations are different across countries. Accordingly, the problem of “Justice Gap” has not been solved so far. In order to resolve this problem, a unified European collective redress system is required. Although the European Commission(“EC”) proposed many policy suggestions, to make a unified regulation applicable in the entire Europe is difficult to achieve. In particular, each country’s different perspective and socio-economic environment makes it impractical to make the same collective redress measure that applies to all of member countries universally. Thus, an alternative – to adopt the U.S. class action system – has been discussed as well. Nonetheless, the U.S. class action system has been heavily criticized due to the concern of abuse including plaintiffs’ possible incentive to bring strike suits. In “Towards a Coherent Approach to Collective Redress” (February 2011), EC has studied the European unified regulations and principles on the settlement of consumers’ collective disputes. Then, through “Public Consultation Working Document,” EC evaluated that an introduction of a modified class arbitration would redress weak aspects of the U.S. class action system. In addition, it is expected that under a modified class arbitration, both plaintiffs and defendants would be treated in a relatively fair way. Furthermore, this modified approach – a combination of the U.S and European approaches – would prevent abuse of consumers’ frivolous suits. At the same time, the modified approach would give incentive to producers to be more careful when they sell their products. Most of all, under this modified approach, consumers would effectively deal with consumer protection problems together and manage the collective action problem although their damage is small individually.
Abstract
Recently, consumer collective redress mechanisms have been discussed and developed institutionally in Europe – many European countries have adopted verbandsklage or class actions. Some European countries, however, do not institutionalize collective redress systems yet. In addition, judicial systems and regulations are different across countries. Accordingly, the problem of “Justice Gap” has not been solved so far. In order to resolve this problem, a unified European collective redress system is required. Although the European Commission(“EC”) proposed many policy suggestions, to make a unified regulation applicable in the entire Europe is difficult to achieve. In particular, each country’s different perspective and socio-economic environment makes it impractical to make the same collective redress measure that applies to all of member countries universally. Thus, an alternative – to adopt the U.S. class action system – has been discussed as well. Nonetheless, the U.S. class action system has been heavily criticized due to the concern of abuse including plaintiffs’ possible incentive to bring strike suits. In “Towards a Coherent Approach to Collective Redress” (February 2011), EC has studied the European unified regulations and principles on the settlement of consumers’ collective disputes. Then, through “Public Consultation Working Document,” EC evaluated that an introduction of a modified class arbitration would redress weak aspects of the U.S. class action system. In addition, it is expected that under a modified class arbitration, both plaintiffs and defendants would be treated in a relatively fair way. Furthermore, this modified approach – a combination of the U.S and European approaches – would prevent abuse of consumers’ frivolous suits. At the same time, the modified approach would give incentive to producers to be more careful when they sell their products. Most of all, under this modified approach, consumers would effectively deal with consumer protection problems together and manage the collective action problem although their damage is small individually.
참고문헌 (41)
- 소비자법상 징벌적 손해배상제 도입에 관한 소고, In 징벌적 손해배상제의 법리와 도입 가능성, "김성천", 한국법제연구원, ~ (2007)
- 이성덕, "EU법 강의" (2010), 박영사
- 신현윤, "경제법 제4판" (2011), 법문사
- 한국소비자원, "소비자집단분쟁조정제도의 현황과 발전 방안", 세미나 자료 (2011)
- William H. Baker, "Class Action Arbitration", Cardozo J. of Conflict Resolution, 336 (2009)
- John H. Beisner, "Expanding Private Cause of Action: Lessons from the Litigation Experience", U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform 2006 Legal Reform Summit (2006)
- Robert G. Bone, "Rethinking the "Day in Court" Ideal and Nonparty Preclusion", N.Y.U.L. REV, 67 (1992)
- Gary Born, "International Commercial Arbitration", ~ (2001)
- , 2006
- Study on the Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Collective Redress Mechanism in the European Union, "Civic Consulting and Oxford Economics", ~ (2008)
- Roger C. Cramton, "Individualized Justice, Mass Torts, and “Settlement Class Actions” : An Introduction", CORNELL L. REV, 80 (1995)
- The European Consumers’ Organisation(BEUC), "Country Survey of Collective Redress Mechanism (updated in July 2010)", ~ (2010)
- Response to the Green Paper on Consumer Collective Redress, "European Justice Forum", ~ (2009)
- Dana Freyer, "Desirability of International Class Arbitration, 2 Contemporary Issues in International Commercial Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers" (2008)
- Eric D. Green, "Advancing individual Rights Through Group Justice", U.C. DAVIS L. REV, 30 (1995)
- Milton Handler, "the Shift from Substantive to Procedural Innovations in Antitrust Suits - The Twenty-Third Annual Antitrust Review", COLUM. L. REV., 71 (2000)
- Michael Haravon, "Enforcement of Annulled Foreign Arbitration Awards: The French Supreme Court Confirms The Hilmarton Trend", MEALEY's INT'L. ARB. REPORT, 22(9) (2007)
- Carrie J. Menkel-Meadow, "Ethics and the Settlements of Mass Torts: When the Rules Meet the Road", Cornell L. Rev, 80 (1995)
- Richard Nagareda, "Aggregate Litigation across the Atlantic and the Future of American Exceptionalism", Vanderbilt Law Review, 1 (2009)
- Philippe Pinsolle, "Recent Significant French Judicial Decisions Involving International Arbitration, 2 Contemporary Issues in International Commercial Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers" (2008)
- Hilmar Raeschke-Kessller, "German and Swiss Judicial Decision Involving International Arbitration, 2 Contemporary Issues in International Commercial Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers" (2008)
- Martin H. Redish, "Class Actions and the Democratic Difficulty: Rethinking the Intersection of Private Litigation and Public Goals", U. CHI. LEGAL F, 2003, pp.71~ (2003)
- A Distant Mirror: The Bill of Peace in Early Modern American Mass Torts and Its Implications for Modern Class Actions, "Thomas D. Rowe Jr.", Duke Law Faculty Scholarsh, ~ (1997)
- David L. Shapiro, "Class Actions: The Class as Party and Client", NOTRE DAME L. REV, 73 (1998)
- Charles Silver, "We're Scared to Death": Class Certification and Blackmail", N.Y.U.L. REV, 78 (2003)
- S.I. Strong, "Enforcing Class Arbitration in the International Sphere: Due Process and Public Policy Concerns", U. PA. J. INT'L.L., 30 (2008)
- S.I. Strong, "The Sounds of Silence: Are U.S. Arbitrators Creating Internationally Enforceable Awards When Ordering Class Arbitration in Cases of Contractual Silence or Ambiguity?", MICH. J. INT'L L., 30 (2008)
- J. Stuyck, "Commission Study on Alternative Means of Consumer Redress other than Redress through Ordinary Judicial Proceedings" (2007), Catholic University of Leuven
- Irene C. Warshauer, "Electronic Discovery and Arbitration: A Shortcut Through E-Discovery, 2 Contemporary Issues in International Commercial Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers" (2008)
- Rhonda Wasserman, "Transnational Class Actions and Interjurisdictional Preclusion", Notre Dame Law Review, 86 (2010)
- Jack B. Weinstein, "Individual Justice in Mass Tort Litiga" (1995)
- Stephen C. Yeazell, "Medieval Group Litigation to the Modern American Action", ~ (1987)
- EC Commission Staff Working Paper; Consumer Empowerment in the EU, , ~, pp.SEC(2011) 469 final (2011)
- EC Commission Staff Working Document Public Consultation: Towards a Coherent European Approach to Collective Redness, , ~, pp.SEC(2011) 173 final (2011)
- EC Draft Report on Towards a Coherent European Approach to Collective Redress, , Committee on Legal Affairs, ~ (2011)
- "EC Qualitative Study on Consumer Redress in the European Union: Consumer's experiences , perceptions and ch", ~ (2009)
- "Overview of the results of the Consultation on Consumer Collective Redress", ~ (2009)
- "EU Consumer Affairs' Press Release", IP, 1800, Brussels, pp.2008, ~
- Green Paper from the Commission of the European Communities on Consumer Collective Redress, "Resolution of the Bundesrat(Federal Council)", ~, pp.COM(2008) 794 final, Council document 16658 (2008), 08
- EU Consumer Policy Strategy 2007-2013, Communication from the Commission to the Council, , The European Parliament and The European Economic and Social Committee, ~, pp.COM(2007) 99 final (2007)
- "Memorandum from the Commission: Consumer Redress", COM, (84), pp.692~ (1984)