Upgrading EU Private International Law for effective collective redress

This paper shows how the EU private international law, which is not adapted to cross-border representative actions, has in fact become a barrier to such actions.  We suggest several solutions to make mass claims more manageable both for claimant organisations and the courts.

BEUC RECOMMENDATIONS

• Where to bring a legal action

Brussels I bis Regulation should be amended and include rules to identify the competent jurisdiction for addressing representative actions brought in the context of cross-border mass harm situations. The competent court should preferably be the court of the domicile of the represented consumers.

Defendants from outside of the EU should be included in the scope of the EU Regulation on jurisdiction. It should be possible to sue them in the EU, especially before the court of the country of the domicile of represented consumers.

• What law should apply to a cross-border case

A new legal provision should be introduced, which would allow applying the provisions of the country where the court is seised, instead of the law of the country where represented consumers are habitually resident. This exception could be limited to cases that are brought in the defendant’s country of establishment. This provision should be included in the upcoming Digital Fairness Act.