Regulating Corporate Behaviour through Collective Claims in the EU and US
Chapter 4: The EU Commission agenda on collective redress: from a “sector specific” to a mainstream discussion of “group justice” questions
The previous section outlined the key issues characterizing the debate on the possibility of devising a “European class action” remedy in the field of competition law. It was argued that the “effectiveness” rationale at the basis of the Crehan damages remedy may make it certainly desirable, if not altogether essential, to introduce measures designed to facilitate the “aggregation” of numerous negative value claims into a large claim to be litigated by representation. It was also emphasized that in doing so, a “fair balance” should be struck between the demands of full access to justice and of the right to a “fair trial” and the public interest in the efficient and sound administration of justice. As was aptly put by Mulheron, rather than looking for “perfect” solutions, each legal system should strive towards the identification of a “proportionate” response to these concerns, taking into account the different and often diverging interests and demands of each litigation system. As was anticipated in Chapter 1, reinforcing private litigation in the field of competition law in the EU has represented an ongoing concern for the Commission, who over the years has proposed the introduction of wide-ranging reforms, designed to harmonize the litigation rules applicable to these cases across the Union.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.