• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Non-Judicial Means of Collective Redress in Europe

0
by Beth Graham

Monday, Dec 15, 2014


Tweet

S.I. Strong, Associate Professor at the University of Missouri School of Law, has published a book chapter entitled  Non-Judicial Means of Collective Redress in Europe in Collective Redress in Europe (Oxford University Press, anticipated 2015); University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2014-29.  In her book chapter, Professor Strong analyzes large-scale arbitration and other non-judicial avenues for collective redress in Europe.

Here is the abstract:

For decades, European nations resisted the notion of collective redress due to widespread hostility to U.S.-style class actions. However, many European jurisdictions have come to the conclusion that large-scale legal relief is now permissible, so long as the procedure does not resemble U.S. class actions. As a result, collective redress mechanisms have proliferated in both number and diversity throughout the region.

A similar situation may be developing in the area of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Initially, European parties and policymakers resisted the development of large-scale arbitration based on similarities between the best-known form of group arbitration, U.S.-style class arbitration, and U.S.-style class actions. However, recent years have seen a great deal of European innovation concerning large-scale dispute resolution.

This chapter discusses the present and the future of non-judicial means of collective redress in Europe, considering both consensual means of large-scale dispute resolution as well as adjudicative measures. Thus, the analysis covers collective settlement procedures in The Netherlands, collective consumer arbitration in Spain, group arbitration of corporate disputes in Germany, and investment arbitration procedures involving large numbers of Italian bondholders. The analysis also discusses the extent to which procedures promulgated by various European arbitral institutions specializing in international commercial arbitration can be used in collective disputes.

Although this book chapter is not currently available for download, other scholarly publications written by Professor Strong may be obtained free of charge from the Social Science Research Network.

Photo credit: martinak15 / Foter / CC BY

Related Posts

  • Arbitration of Internal Trust Disputes: The Next Frontier for International Commercial Arbitration?Arbitration of Internal Trust Disputes: The Next Frontier for International Commercial Arbitration?
  • Incentives for Large-Scale Arbitration: How Policymakers Can Influence Party BehaviourIncentives for Large-Scale Arbitration: How Policymakers Can Influence Party Behaviour
  • Beyond International Commercial Arbitration? the Promise of International Commercial MediationBeyond International Commercial Arbitration? the Promise of International Commercial Mediation
  • International Arbitration and Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. Section 1782International Arbitration and Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. Section 1782
  • Article | Research in International Commercial Arbitration: Special Skills, Special SourcesArticle | Research in International Commercial Arbitration: Special Skills, Special Sources
  • Applying the Lessons of International Commercial Arbitration to International Commercial Mediation: A Dispute System Design AnalysisApplying the Lessons of International Commercial Arbitration to International Commercial Mediation: A Dispute System Design Analysis

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy