Presentation at the Federal University of Esparto Santo, Brazil
News
Webinar: Law in Public Interest: Collective Redress, Funding & Climate Regulation
Our Vici team organises an online seminar titled ‘Law in the Public Interest: Collective Redress, and Litigation Funding and Climate Change Regulation’ on 19 November from 15-17 hrs (CET).
The event will explore the intersections between legal frameworks and the public interest in a time of increasing concerns about climate change, corporate responsibility, and the cost barriers to pursuing collective justice. As climate change becomes a global priority, regulatory frameworks and climate litigation are holding governments and corporations accountable for their environmental impact. Collective redress and litigation funding also fulfil this role and are gaining prominence in recent years with the adoption of legislation such as the EU Representative Actions Directive and the Dutch WAMCA and with high-profile cases like the Post Office litigation in the UK.
Esteemed speakers are: Eva van der Zee (University of Hamburg, Germany) on Behavioural Insights on Climate Change Law; Koen Rutten (Finch, Netherlands) on Is Funding Collective Litigation still Affordable? and Flora Page (23ES, United Kingdom) on What the Bates v Post Office Litigation reveals about the Pros and Cons of Litigation Funding. Introduction and moderation by Adrian Cordina and Xandra Kramer
Register before 19 November for free here.
Published: May 3, 2021
Carlota Ucín was invited to participate in a webinar organized by the Research group Fundamentos do Processo Civil Contemporâneo (FPCC) coordinated by Professor Dr Hermes Zaneti Jr. at the Federal University of Espirito Santo, Brazil (UFES). In her presentation, she outlined the main features of Public Interest Litigation and how it may have a great impact on promoting access to justice of fundamental rights. In particular, she highlighted that the shift from public to private funding of civil litigation could be benefited from the Public Interest approach, which is more concentrated in raising certain claims that could imply lower cost with greater benefits. This can be explained in part because these claims may provoke the change of a bureaucratic practice or they could protect some public goods. The exchange was very enriching for both sides since Brazil has great experience in this kind of litigation and must face great dilemmas related to costs and access to justice.