Out-of-court justice in the European Enforcement Landscape – 1st EU Civil Justice Seminar
From December 2021 to June 2022, the team of the Vici project ‘Affordable Access to Justice’ at Erasmus School of Law is organising an online seminar series dedicated to the Trends and Challenges in Costs and Funding of Civil Justice.
The series “Trends and Challenges in Costs and Funding of Civil Justice” kicked off in December 2021 with a general session that addressed several topics of access to justice and costs and funding, including collective redress and costs reforms, and a Law & Economics perspective. The second seminar in January 2022 was dedicated to legal mobilisation in the EU. The third one in February addressed the impact of Public Interest Litigation on access to justice, and the fourth one in March litigation funding in Europe from a market perspective. The remaining seminars will zoom in on austerity policies and litigation costs reforms, funding and costs of ADR in civil justice, and EU regulation of Third Party Funding.
You can register for (one or more of) the seminars here.
Wednesday, 25 May 2022 (15-17 CEST)
To attend the online event, please register here.
15.45 - 15.00: Registration / Zoom Connection
15.00 - 15.15: Masood Ahmed (Leicester Law School)
Welcome Address and Introduction
15.15 – 15.35: Sue Prince (University of Exeter)
Building bridges and fences: Mapping routes to resolving disputes using technology
15.35 - 15.55: Nicolas Kyriakides (University of Nicosia)
Affordability of ADR in Cyprus in light of new Civil Procedure Rules
15.55 – 16.10: Break
16.10 - 16.30: Dorcas Quek Anderson (Singapore Management University)
Counting the Cost of Enlarging the Role of ADR in Funding Civil Justice
16.30 - 17.00: Discussion & Conclusion of the Seminar
More information and registration here.
Sue Prince is the Head of the Law School at the University of Exeter. Her research interests focus on access to justice in the civil courts looking particularly at the role of court-based mediation. She has conducted a number of empirical studies of the impact of mediation in the courts for bodies such as the Civil Justice Council and the Ministry of Justice.
Nicolas Kyriakides is a lawyer, academic and lobbyist. He is a graduate of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, he holds postgraduate degrees from UCL and NYU and a PhD (DPhil) from the University of Oxford. He has also been a visiting researcher at Harvard University.
Dorcas Quek Anderson is Associate Dean (Student, Staff & Alumni Affairs) and an Assistant Professor of Law in the Singapore Management University’s Yong Pung How School of Law. As a practising mediator and a former District Judge in the State Courts, Dorcas’ research is drawn from her experience and explores the interaction between dispute resolution developments and access to justice. Her research has been published in leading international journals including the Civil Justice Quarterly and the Harvard Negotiation Law Review.
Published: June 8, 2021
On Thursday 6 May, our seminar series on ‘EU Civil Justice’ kicked off with a general introduction to the series by Xandra Kramer. The first two-hour seminar dealt with the role of out-of-court justice in the European enforcement landscape. Taking a holistic perspective, our invited speaker Fabrizio Cafaggi (Judge at the Italian Council of State, former professor at the EUI and the University of Trento) talked about the role of Article 47 EUCFR in shaping the interaction between different enforcement processes. Specifically, Cafaggi explained how Article 47 EUCFR has institutional implications for the balance between individual and collective redress and for the relationship between judicial and administrative enforcement as well as ADR. The Court of Justice of the European Union has played a key role in employing the fundamental right to an effective remedy to give shape to their complementarity. Reference points are the Court’s rulings in Cases C-73/16 - Puškár, C-317/08 - Alassini, C-75/16 - Menini and Rampanelli and C-381/14 - Sales Sinués. According to Cafaggi, the case-law shows that Article 47 generally favors choice between different processes. However, mandatory sequences that oblige to either exhaust administrative remedies or attempt ADR before accessing judicial remedies are not excluded as long as certain conditions are met. Betül Kas (post-doctoral researcher, Erasmus University Rotterdam) zoomed in on the relationship between ADR and court proceedings in collective disputes by discussing the highly contentious collective settlement in the Volkswagen litigation in Germany. Kas reconstructed the procedural and practical circumstances that lead the Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband - vzbv) to settle outside the procedural scope of the German model case procedure (Musterfeststellungsklage). While this move withdrew the settlement from the safeguards installed within the procedure and any judicial oversight, it enhanced the choice of individual consumers, which could either accept Volkswagen’s settlement offer or pursue individual judicial proceedings benefitting from the suspension of the limitation period. The topic of collective settlements raises interesting questions about safeguarding Article 47 in opt-in/opt-out mechanisms and as to the degree of judicial involvement required in collective settlements. The discussion raised further interesting question of a principal nature, such as the meaning of ‘privatization’ and ‘effectiveness’ in EU civil justice.