31 May Collective redress mechanisms in consumer protection in the European Union and South East Europe
In the framework of the project, “Development of collective redress for consumers in South East Europe” implemented by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, Open Regional Fund for South East Europe – Legal Reform a comparative research on “Collective redress mechanisms in light of the European Commission Recommendation (2013/396/EU) on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms” was conducted in six EU countries (Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and England/Wales) and six SEE countries (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia).
The focus of the research was on the EU approach to collective redress, EU Member States’ approach to collective redress, national compliance of SEE countries with the relevant EU consumer acquis, national legal and institutional framework for collective redress, the role of courts, inspection bodies, regulatory bodies, ombudsman and others in collective redress, the role of consumer organisations in collective redress, cross-national comparisons and issues of commonality and difference.
The research was carried out by twelve national experts (nine professors in law from the South East European Law School Network (SEELS), one independent expert, one representative from an international organisation and one NGO representative from the Consumer Organisations Network for South East Europe (ConWeB) and two international experts and eleven national rapporteurs from the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL).
The research is compiled in a Comparative Study structured into four parts: 1. Collective redress mechanisms in the EU: a comparative study of selected European Member States; 2. Collective redress in consumer protection in South East Europe: country reports; 3. Comparative overview of collective redress in consumer protection in South East Europe: cross-national comparisons, issues of commonality and difference; and 4. Conclusions and recommendations.