Evaluation European Enforcement Order
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: February 1, 2021
The European Order for Payment Regulation became applicable in 2005 and aims to smoothen cross-border enforcement of debts. After the partial abolition of exequatur in the enforcement rules on parental responsibility in the Brussels II-bis Regulation, it was the first broad instrument to abolish intermediate proceedings for enforcement in civil and commercial matters as far is it concerns an uncontested claim. For that purpose it introduces a number of minimum norms of civil procedure, in particular on the service of documents and information. This instrument was followed by a number of other instruments, including the European order for payment procedure, the Small Claims procedure and the Account preservation order, that advanced the harmonisation of civil procedure and the abolition of exequatur. With the Brussels I-bis Regulation becoming applicable in 2015, the abolition of exequatur with the aim to simplify cross-border enforcement reached its momentum.
Fifteen years after the European Enforcement Order Regulation became applicable it was high time that the Regulation be evaluated. Xandra Kramer acted as national reporter for the Netherlands. In addition, she wrote a response to the public consultation on the request of the European Law Institute (here) and participated to an opinion of the EAPIL (here).
Apart from evaluating the overall functioning in the Member States, the question is also whether it is still a useful instrument considering the enactment of new instruments and the abolition of exequatur under Brussels I-bis. While it is still used in the Netherlands and part of the other Member States, the undesired multiplicity and incoherence of instruments in the area of European civil procedure coupled with the inherent complexity of the present Regulation cast doubt. While it has served its purpose in enhancing access to justice its value in the present European civil justice system is very limited.