Brussels, 08/05/2013 (Agence Europe) - At the end of May, the commissioner for justice, Viviane Reding, will present a non-binding recommendation on collective redress, whereby consumers and companies can undertake national level proceedings when they feel they are the injured party when legal infringements have been committed.
According to a draft text of which EUROPE has obtained a copy, the Commission is recommending member states set up national collective redress systems within the next two years. These will be used to ensure that economic operators cease certain practices (“injunctive relief”) and will enable natural and corporate bodies to obtain damages (“compensatory relief”). In an effort to ensure that these systems are not subject to fundamental differences, the Commission has stipulated a number of principles on which national systems should be based: the setting up of representative bodies, the right to information, funding for procedures, the setting up of complainants' groups (“opt-in” option advocated), a ban on imposing punitive damages, the creation of alternative litigation settlement systems and the drawing up of national registers. This recommendation will apply to all sectors of activity, particularly to cases involving consumer protection, competition, the environment and personal data.
After analysing the results of a consultation that took place in 2011(see EUROPE 10309), the Commission points out that consumers and the academic world are in favour of introducing European mechanisms, unlike industry and the majority of legal cabinets. Some member states (Bulgaria, Greece, Poland, Portugal and Italy) advocate a binding text but this is opposed by (Germany, Austria, France, Hungary, and the Czech Republic). Other countries would not be against binding action on targeted issues (Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom and Latvia).
In 2009, the commissioner for competition, Neelie Kroes, attempted to propose a binding text that Commission President Barroso blocked before its adoption at the College, mainly because it clashed with national interests and those of industry and was based on a procedure that circumvented the European Parliament. The non-binding option chosen by way of the recommendation would, therefore, be a way of reassuring opponents of a European regulatory framework. In some quarters, however, this new approach is seen as the first step towards a binding text, once the observation is made that the recommendation has proved ineffective.
Above all, the draft directive that Reding will be presenting the same day will leave it up to the member states themselves to choose the way in which collective redress is introduced with regard to respect for competition law. This proposal and recommendation should logically help to create the basis for a future European collective redress system. (MB/transl.fl)