Private Enforcement as a Deterrence Tool: A Blind Spot in the Omnibus-directive

Charlotte Pavillon
{"title":"Private Enforcement as a Deterrence Tool: A Blind Spot in the Omnibus-directive","authors":"Charlotte Pavillon","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3418907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Directive on better enforcement and modernization of EU consumer protection rules or Omnibus-directive does not acknowledge the deterrence function of private enforcement of EU consumer law. The article demonstrates that the balancing of the principles of effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness requires more attention when it comes to ‘civil remedies’. Indeed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has in recent years put a clear emphasis on the deterrence function of the nonbinding effect of unfair contract terms, a civil sanction imposed by civil courts. These courts, however, are struggling with the implications of this function. They are actively searching for direction by referring new preliminary questions to the CJEU. Empirical research conducted in the Netherlands shows that Dutch district courts largely recognize their role as enforcer of EU consumer law. It also reveals that these courts consider the proportionality and the dissuasiveness of the sanction to be at odds when the gap left after the removal of an unfair contract term is not filled with national law.\nEuropean consumer law, sanctions, civil law, unfair contract terms, civil courts","PeriodicalId":246136,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3418907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Directive on better enforcement and modernization of EU consumer protection rules or Omnibus-directive does not acknowledge the deterrence function of private enforcement of EU consumer law. The article demonstrates that the balancing of the principles of effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness requires more attention when it comes to ‘civil remedies’. Indeed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has in recent years put a clear emphasis on the deterrence function of the nonbinding effect of unfair contract terms, a civil sanction imposed by civil courts. These courts, however, are struggling with the implications of this function. They are actively searching for direction by referring new preliminary questions to the CJEU. Empirical research conducted in the Netherlands shows that Dutch district courts largely recognize their role as enforcer of EU consumer law. It also reveals that these courts consider the proportionality and the dissuasiveness of the sanction to be at odds when the gap left after the removal of an unfair contract term is not filled with national law. European consumer law, sanctions, civil law, unfair contract terms, civil courts
作为威慑工具的私人执法:综合指令中的盲点
关于更好地执行和现代化欧盟消费者保护规则的指令或综合指令不承认欧盟消费者法私人执行的威慑功能。本文论证了在“民事救济”中,应当注意有效原则、比例原则和劝阻原则的平衡。事实上,欧洲联盟法院(CJEU)近年来明确强调不公平合同条款的无约束力的威慑功能,这是民事法院施加的一种民事制裁。然而,这些法院正在与这一功能的含义作斗争。他们将新的预备问题提交给法院,积极寻找方向。在荷兰进行的实证研究表明,荷兰地方法院在很大程度上承认他们作为欧盟消费者法执行者的角色。它还表明,这些法院认为,在取消不公平合同条款后留下的空白没有由国内法填补时,制裁的相称性和劝阻性是不一致的。欧洲消费者法,制裁,民法,不公平合同条款,民事法庭
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信