This book provides precious insight into the dynamics of this new approach to consolidating European Civil Justice, clearly outlining the motivations of the various national and institutional players involved and examining potential obstacles likely to be encountered along the way. The book represents a work of reference for anyone involved in academia, practice or law reform in this subject area.

'This publication is extremely interesting since it shows that the law of the European Union has an impact on national procedural law. Cross-fertilisation is indeed a very important tool.'--Marcel Storme, Honorary Pres. of the International Assoc. of Procedural Law ***This book discusses the impact of EU law on selected national legal systems. The authors analyze how the civil procedure system of their countries has reacted to increasing Europeanisation and the influence of EU law. They identify significant changes and disseminate the reasons for particular developments and the further implications of EU law on the civil procedure. Europe is in a period of increasing Europeanisation of civil procedure. Procedural elements of EU law are based on decentralised enforcement, leaving enforcement and procedural issues to the Member States. Consequently, there is vast amount of EU case law that is relevant for national procedural law. The supremacy of EU law and, inter alia, the requirements of effectiveness and equivalence may be relevant for several topics of national civil procedural law. Both EU legislation and doctrinal changes in EU case law touch upon various topics of the procedural law of the Member States. A comprehensive comparison between the countries represented in the book is made. (Series: Ius Commune Europaeum, Vol. 150) Subject: EU Law, National Law]

Written by leading authorities in the field of European civil procedure and collective redress, this timely book explores the model collective proceedings rules in the ELI/UNDROIT European Rules of Civil Procedure. It explains the intended application of this ‘best practice’ set of collective redress rules, intended to promote greater consistency in civil and commercial court procedure across Europe, linking to existing European practice and initiatives in the field.

Examining a burgeoning policy area of the EU - the regulation of cross border civil and commercial litigation - this title analyses the EU's specific legislative measures and assesses their impact on litigation procedure, particularly due process rights.

European co-operation has resulted in many new and challenging opportunities for legal scholars who, since the so-called 'codification period', have become used to operating in a purely national context. This applies also to scholars in the field of civil procedure, who, for a considerable period of time, have resisted leaving the purely national domain. These scholars have devoted a great deal of attention to the question whether or not harmonisation of civil procedural law is a feasible option, and, if so, in what manner harmonisation should be achieved. The contributors to this book seek to further the harmonisation debate by exploring some of the main trends in the development of civil procedural law during the last two centuries in several European countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, England and Wales, The Netherlands and Belgium). Two of the central issues that are addressed by the contributors are the extent to which the various procedural models have influenced each other and the extent to which common traditions in civil procedural law may be distinguished in Europe. Each general chapter in this book is supplemented by three chapters devoted to specific procedural topics: Conciliation, Party Interrogation as Evidence and the Role of the Judge. In addition, extensive bibliographical references are included.

Not so long ago, class actions were considered to be a textbook example of American exceptionalism; many of their main features were assumed to be incompatible with the culture of the civil law world. However, the tide is changing; while there are now trends in the USA toward limiting or excluding class actions, notorious cases like Dieselgate are moving more and more European jurisdictions to extend the reach of their judicial collective redress mechanisms. For many new fans of class actions, collective redress has become a Holy Grail of sorts, a miraculous tool that will rejuvenate national systems of civil justice and grant them unprecedented power. Still, while the introduction of various forms of representative action has virtually become a fashion, it is anything but certain that attempting to transplant American-style class action will be successful. European judicial structures and legal culture(s) are fundamentally different, which poses a considerable challenge. This book investigates whether class actions in Europe are indeed a Holy Grail or just another wrong turn in the continuing pursuit of just and effective means of protecting the rights of citizens and businesses. It presents both positive and critical perspectives, supplemented by case studies on the latest collectivization trends in Europe’s national civil justice systems. The book also shares the experiences of some non-European jurisdictions that have developed promising hybrid forms of collective redress, such as Canada, Brazil, China, and South Africa. In closing, a selection of topical international cases that raise interesting issues regarding the effectiveness of class actions in an international context are studied and discussed.

This volume addresses the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in mainland China, Hong Kong and various European jurisdictions. It provides an overview and an analysis of how these respective roles have been changed in order to cope with growing caseloads and quality demands. It also shows the different approaches chosen in the jurisdictions covered. Mainland China is introducing far-reaching reforms in its system of civil litigation. From an inquisitorial procedure, in which the parties play a relatively minor role, the country is changing to a more adversarial system with increased powers for the parties. At the same time, case management and the role of the judge as it is understood in mainland China remains different from case management and the role of the judge in Western countries, mainly as regards the limited powers of individual Chinese judges in this respect. Changes in China are justified by the ever-increasing case load of the Chinese courts and the consequent inability to deal with cases in an adequate manner, even though generally speaking Chinese courts still adjudicate civil cases within a relatively short time frame (this may, however, be problematic when viewed from the perspective of the quality of adjudication). Growing caseloads and quality concerns may also be observed in various European states and Hong Kong. In these jurisdictions the civil procedural systems have a relatively adversarial character and it is some of the adversarial features of the existing systems of procedure which are felt to be problematic. Therefore, the lawmakers have opted for increasing the powers of the judge, often making the judge and the parties mutually responsible for the proper conduct of civil cases. Starting from opposite directions, mainland China and the various European states and Hong Kong could meet half way in their reform attempts. This is, however, only possible if a proper understanding is fostered of the developments in these different parts of the World. Even though in both China and Europe the academic community and lawmakers are showing a keen interest in the relevant developments abroad, a study addressing the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in both China and Europe is still missing. This book aims to fill this gap in the existing literature.