Alternative and Online Dispute Resolution for Cross-Border Consumer Contracts: a Critical Evaluation of the European Legislature’s Recent Efforts to Boost Competitiveness and Growth in the Internal Market

被引:0
|
作者
Rühl G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Carl-Zeiß-Straße 3, Jena
关键词
ADR; Consumer contracts; Distortion of competition; Fundamental freedoms; Harmonization; Internal market; Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters; Language; ODR; Principle of conferral;
D O I
10.1007/s10603-015-9296-2
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In May 2013, the European legislature enacted two measures relating to Alternative Dispute Resolution in consumer matters: the Directive on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR-Directive) and the Regulation on Online Dispute Resolution (ODR-Regulation). Both measures are intended to support the out-of-court settlement of consumer disputes with a view to ensure that consumers have straight-forward and low-cost access to justice. This article analyses whether and to what extent the ADR-Directive and the ODR-Regulation manage to achieve this aim in the field of cross-border consumer contracts. It sheds light on the European legislature’s competence to regulate ADR, analyses the potential benefits of cross-border ADR, details the specific problems of cross-border ADR, and determines whether and to what extent the ADR-Directive and the ODR-Regulation resolve these problems. The article concludes that the ADR-Directive and the ODR-Regulation—while providing relief for some of the problems associated with cross-border ADR—fail to resolve the two core problems of competence and language. Accordingly, it is unlikely that the ADR-Directive and the ODR-Regulation will significantly promote cross-border ADR and enhance cross-border consumer access to justice. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media New York.
引用
收藏
页码:431 / 456
页数:25
相关论文
共 2 条