Class action litigation in the United States and some European countries with an emphasis on Finland, an experience for Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 private law,Shahid Beheshti university,pardise 2,Tehran,Iran

2 private law,faculty of law. Shahid Beheshti university, Associate Professor

Abstract

Class Action Litigation in the United States and some European Countries with an emphasis on Finland, an experience for Iran
Abstract
The United States has adopted theClass Action litigation (CAL) on a wide range of issues and has preferred private enforcement with court supervision over public enforcement, and has applied the Opt-out system on the CAL without the right for the members to leave the group, except for litigation on any damages claims. Some European countries with civil law systems, including Finland have had a pessimistic and critical view towards the American version of the CAL. They have tried to enact the CAL, to the extent possible, to the limited issues and scope of the application. On the other hand, some of these countries have adopted the Opt-in system and have a preference for public enforcement rather than private enforcement. On the contrary, supporters of the American version believe that the opponents have not provided any empirical and practical arguments for their pessimism. The supporters of the American model believe that the main reason for not accepting this model is because of the lobbying and the compromises made by the potential defendants, namely the owners of large corporations and industries on one hand and government officials and legislators on the other. Statistics show only a small number of such claims filed in these European countries' courts. The outcome of these limited requests show the ineffectiveness of the chosen method.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Alexandra D. Lahav, Two view of the class action, 79 Fordham L. Rev, 2011.
  2. Anderson, Brian; Trask, Andrew, The Class Action Playbook, Oxford University Press, 2010.
  3. Bronsteen, John; Fiss, Owen, "The Class Action Rule", Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 78, No. 5, 2003.
  4. Chris, H. Miller, The Adaptive American Judiciary: From Classical Adjudication to Class Action Litigation, Albany Law Review, Vol 72, 2009.
  5. Cooper Alexander, Janet, An Introduction to Class A ction Procedure in the United States, Presented Conference: Debate Over Group Litigation in Comparative Perspective, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000.
  6. Blank, Joshua, A. Zacks, Eric, Dismissing the Class: A Practical Approach to the Class Action Ristriction on the Legal Services Corporation, Penn State Law Review, Vol. 110, 2005.
  7. Sherman, Edward, Consumer Class Actions: Decline and Fall? ABA journal, Vol 51, 2007.
  8. Gidi, Antonio, "Class Action in Brazil A Model for Civil Law Countries", The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 51, 2003.
  9. Hazard, Geoffrey C.; Taruffo, Michele, American Civil Procedure: An Introduction, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993.
  10. Issacharoff, Samuel, collective action and class action, New York University School of Law, Sep. 2017.
  11. Jurgen G. Backhaus & others, The Law & Economics of Class Action in Europe: lessons from America, published by Edward Elgar publishing limited, UK, 2012.
  12. Mohseni, Hasan; Ghaffari Farsani, Behnam; Shooshinsab Nafiseh, Collective Cases and Their Role in Recognizing the Rights of Consumers of Consumers, Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, Autumn 2012.
  13. Moloody, Mohammad; Haji Azizi, Bijan; Safari, Nahid, Study of the Law of Contemplation: The Basis for Collective Cases, Quarterly Journal of Legal Research, No. 75.
  14. Mulheren, Rechael, The Class Action in Common Law Legal System: A Comparative Perspective, 2004.
  15. Ancheta, Angelo, "Defendant Class Action & Federal Civil Right Litigation", UCLA Law Review, Vol 33, 1985-1986.
  16. Parliament Research Center, visible at the base http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/93997
  17. Rubenstein, William B., ″Why Enable Litigation? A Positive Externalities Theory of the Small Claims ClassAction″, 20 UMKC Law Review, No. 10, 2006.
  18. Shams, Abdullah, Principle of Comparison, Journal of Legal Research, 2002, No. 35-36.
  19. Silver, Charles, Class Action- Representation Proceeding, in 5 Encyclopedia of Law & Economics, Boudewijn Bouckaert & Gerrit De Geest eds, 2000.
  20. Solomon, Louis M., ″European Dis-Union in Collective Redress Actions: A Failed Experiment- So Far″, International Financial Law Review, October, 2010.
  21. Shen, Fransis, "The Overlooked Utility of The Defendant Class Action", Denver University Law Review, 2010. http://www.law.du.edu

 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 December 2018
  • Revise Date: 27 July 2019
  • Accept Date: 27 July 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics