1 / 7

Opt in vs. Opt out

Opt in vs. Opt out. Emmanuel Gybels. Introductionary remark : there is not one answer to this question – approach varies depending on type of claim and area of the law. Opt out collective redress : advantages. Access to Legal System Note that I did not say « Access to Justice »

hammer
Télécharger la présentation

Opt in vs. Opt out

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Opt invs.Opt out Emmanuel Gybels

  2. Introductionary remark : there is not one answer to this question – approach varies depending on type of claim and area of the law

  3. Opt out collective redress : advantages • Access to Legal System • Note that I did not say « Access to Justice » • It is undeniable that a great number of claims are not brought – distance, cost, limited amount of claim, language, • If it is true that a number of claims are brought, successfully, in an individual manner, or according to existent framework, it is simply unknown how many are not; • One can only note that private enforcement is something that works in the US (notably in AT) and is not working in EU; • Efficiency • It simply cannot be denied that it is more efficient if all claims pertaining to the same issue, in various jurisdictions, brought by numerous parties are grouped together – less court time, less lawyers, one proceeding, etc • Increased compliance by corporations • A more efficient redress system/private enforcement brings increased compliance • Corporations or trade associations who are opposing this represent the wrongdoers. The rightdoers should not be afraid. If sufficiently frightening will not risk infringement

  4. Optout advantages • Settlement • A centralised class approach brings, with the exception of people opting out, the possibility of final settlements, turning the page, incentive to settle; • More efficient competition • Increased compliance brings a level playing field in which all corporations, large and small, national or multinational, have to comply with the same rules and competitive advantages • It benefits mainly small corporations, majority in EU • Reality • 99% of claims would not be brought if no opt out system

  5. Issues / Challenges • Concept is alien to some fundamental principles of European legal systems • « Nul ne plaide par procureur » • Art. 6 ECHR • Everybody is entitled to defend his own case; • What is intrinsically wrong with private enforcement /collective redress? • Technical solutions can be found • Damages • Treble / Punitive damages • Again, this is parallel with US antitrust rules, where the law forces judges to pronounce treble damages in certain cases, because it is considered to be crucial to economic life; • If the only incentive is to pay damages suffered, this is not really a threat; • Treble damages are rarely paid – case is settled before trial – treble damages are first to go. • Civil Jury • Lots of the astronomical damages are due to fact that there are civil juries – this is not our tradition – we should not install them

  6. Challenges / Issues • Procedure • Jurisdiction/language/speed/ cost efficiency … • How is this going to be organized; how will we harmonize procedural differences of various EU countries • Evidence gathering / discovery / shift of the burden of proof • Fear of discovery type actions and associated cost and business secrets – could be circumvented by shift of burden of proof – once wrongdoing plausible defendant needs to make his case; AT proceedings– commission file; • Lawyers / Client Relationship / Fees • Most of these issues are ethical – let’s change the ethical rules • Ownership of the case – again – fear of US opt out system – there is an opt out – maybe should make it easier – importance of information / advertising ? • Contingency fees • This type of cases requires, per definition, high investments (experts, travel, document reviews, pleadings, etc. …), unless the authorities are prepared to fund it will naturally come from lawyers/third party financing • However, this can be curtailed. It would be hypocrisy to think that is not circumvented right now.

  7. Opt in Opt out : conclusion • Misconception : opt out automatically results in US type litigation excesses • Opt in : at present stage of development will only work in very limited circumstances; practical adjustments will be needed to make it successful

More Related