Live Stream! Delivering Access to justice – Solutions of the Future -seminar 30.1.

,

Seminaaria on mahdollista seurata suorana lähetyksenä COMI:n youtube-kanavalla. Linkit esitysten materiaaleihin alla.

Seminar will be live streamed via youtube. You can find links to presentation materials below.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbp8sWMrhkr-otnSDdQCduw

Programme

14.00- 14.15
Coffee/ Tea

14.15 – 14.20
Opening and Welcome by the Chairman of the seminar
Prof Kimmo Nuotio

14.20 – 16.15
Prof Dr Christopher Hodges and Prof Dr Stefaan Voet PDF
1. An overview of the debate in EU on collective redress
Issues:
(a) a wish to improve consumer redress, driven largely by a small number of major scandals, so the response is political rather than empirical, since ADR is the primary consumer redress mechanism,
(b) deep concern in the EU over the US class action model, and its ‘abuse’ and exploitation by lawyer intermediaries with little benefit to consumers,
(c) political statements, based on no empirical evidence, that safeguards will be effective in guarding against abuse,
(d) fluctuating in political willingness at EU level to introduce harmonising legislation on collective actions for damages (as opposed to redress), and the conundrum of which model to adopt, as there are so many.

2. The state of collective action laws/mechanisms in EU
Issues:
(a) slow appearance, but now 21 Member States have a form of collective action, but
(b) the mechanisms are all different;
(c) empirical evidence shows that they are rarely used (because of safeguards (the catch 22 problem) and more importantly because there are other better mechanisms available).

3. Other mechanisms of delivering collective redress
Issues:
(a) civil claims piggy-back on criminal prosecutions,
(b) regulatory redress,
(c) consumer ombudsmen (a specific and the most advanced form of consumer ADR) and
(d) in the personal injury field, administrative compensation schemes.

4. Comparing empirical evidence on different mechanisms of collective redress against criteria
Issues:
(a) What should be the criteria? eg accessibility, speed, cost, and delivery of outcomes.
(b) How do the model(s) score against the criteria?
(c) What other objectives and benefits might be achievable, eg data on market behaviour, that can drive regulation and changes in behaviour?

5. Conclusions for policy
Issues:
(a) Which model(s) should be adopted to deliver redress?
(b) What changes are needed in legal system architectures, such as market regulatory or ombudsmen systems?

16.30 – Invited Comments & General Discussion
Chaired by Prof Kimmo Nuotio

Better Regulation in the Periphery of the Legal System – Who? How? What? PDF
Doctoral Student Petra Hietanen-Kunwald 

Access and Due Process PDF
Doctoral Student Santtu Turunen

Dispatch by a Estate Distributor as Dispute Settlement PDF PAPER
Senior Lecturer Tapani Lohi

Better Justice through Legal Tech? Roadmap to User-friendly Law 2.0 PDF
Assistant Professor Riikka Koulu

General discussion

17.15 Closing and Drinks

1 reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] tällä viikolla seminaariin, jossa käsiteltiin juuri yllä kuvattuja teemoja. Seminaarin pääpuhujina olivat aiheeseen […]

Comments are closed.