EU Moves Closer to Legalizing Class Actions
The legislation, known as the Representative Actions Directive, would allow consumers in the EU's 28 member nations to launch common claims for compensation for faulty or illegal consumer goods.
December 02, 2019 at 12:13 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The European Union has taken a step toward giving consumers the right to file U.S.-style class-action suits.
Four years after the "Dieselgate" scandal in which Volkswagen and other European carmakers installed software to hide vehicle tailpipe emissions and get around strict pollution laws, some EU member countries still do not offer consumers the right to launch class-action lawsuits.
Last week, the EU's Council, made up of ministers from the 28 national governments, agreed to start talks with lawmakers on legislation that would allow pan-European class actions. But even with last week's decision, consumers may have to wait another three-and-a-half years before they can exercise these rights.
The legislation, known as the Representative Actions Directive, would allow consumers in all or several of the EU's 28 member nations to launch common claims for compensation for faulty or illegal consumer goods.
At the moment, nine of the EU's 28 countries do not allow consumers to launch class actions, while in 11 countries the restrictive rules for class actions deter consumers from launching collective claims.
The proposed legislation is highly controversial. Business groups have expressed concern that the directive could lead to a spate of litigation and "forum shopping," as groups and their lawyers bring cases in different EU countries to maximize their chances of winning their cases and getting compensation.
Andrew Austin, a London-based partner with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in the firm's disputes, litigation and arbitration practice, wrote in a blog published last week that the EU's national ministers had improved the original draft legislation by addressing a number of problems. These included strengthening the criteria for "qualified entities" that are allowed to bring collective actions on behalf of consumers, he wrote in the blog.
Austin said that the legal text still posed a number of areas for concern for businesses. These include the possibility for national governments to propose their own systems for collective redress which, he said, would increase the chances of cases being launched under different legal regimes. He also highlighted a decision by the council to extend the scope of the legislation to medical devices.
European consumer groups welcomed last week's progress. Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumer Organisation, said in a statement that the council's decision was "solid ground on which negotiations towards a final text can now begin."
In a statement, the association expressed concern that governments wanted to limit the possibilities for associations representing consumers to get financing for collective redress actions. "Litigation costs are one of the biggest impediments to launching a group action for non-profit organisations like consumer groups. Quite a number of consumer organisations in the EU would struggle to finance litigation costs by themselves," the statement said.
Goyens welcomed the decision to extend the legislation to cover medical devices.
Following last week's decision, the EU's national governments will begin talks with members of the European Parliament to reach an agreement on a final version of the text. This could be completed in the first half of 2020, although it might take until the second half of the year.
In either case, consumers would not be able to use the new law until three-and-a-half years after it has been finalized because national governments want time to introduce the new provisions.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNJ Jury Awards $8M to Woman Injured by Employees Chasing Suspected Shoplifter
3 minute readNevada Supreme Court Rejects Uber-Backed Ballot Initiative for 20% Fee Cap
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Midsize Firm Bressler Amery Absorbs Austin Boutique, Gaining Four Lawyers
- 2Bill Would Allow Californians to Sue Big Oil for Climate-Linked Wildfires, Floods
- 3LinkedIn Suit Says Millions of Profiles Scraped by Singapore Firm’s Fake Accounts
- 4Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Lawsuit Over FBI Raid at Wrong House
- 5What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250