Group litigation in Scandinavia

被引：1

作者：

Lindblom P.H. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Faculty of Law, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 20

来源：

ERA Forum | 2009年 / 10卷 / 1期

关键词：

Access to justice; Class action; Costs; Court; Damages; Denmark; Finland; Norway; Opt in; Opt out; Organisation action; Public action; Res judicata; Sweden;

D O I：

10.1007/s12027-009-0102-y

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Public and organisation actions have existed for decades in the Labour Court and the Market Court in Sweden. The Group Proceedings Act of 2002 also made it possible to bring private group (class) actions, public actions, and organisation actions for injunctions and individual damages in all areas of civil law in which general courts are competent. Similar (but not identical) Acts were introduced in Denmark and Norway in 2008. The English rule on costs is applied. The judgment is res judicata for and against all group members who have opted in. To date, eleven private group actions and one public action (by the Consumer Ombudsman) have been brought in Sweden but no organisation action. Seven group actions have been brought in Norway and one in Denmark. The case-law illustrates several procedural functions which group actions have: provision of access to justice and compensation, behaviour modification, precedent-building and judicial law-making, judicial review, and provision of a forum for legal policy debate and for ethical/moral discourse. Introduction of the Acts met with strong resistance from business, finance, conservative politicians and some judges and lawyers. By the time of writing (December 2008), no abuse had occurred of the Swedish Act. The funding issue is crucial to the inclination to litigate. © 2009 ERA.

引用

页码：7 / 35

页数：28

共 15 条

[1] Die Bündelung gleichgerichteter Interessen im Prozess, (1999)
[2] Bogart W.A., Questioning litigation's role-courts and class actions in Canada, Indiana Law J., 62, (1986)
[3] Bratt P., Harling K., Fordelene er større end olemperne, Advokaten (Denmark), 7, 6
[4] Hensler D., Et al., Class Action Dilemmas. Pursuing Public Goals for Private Gain, (2000)
[5] Lindblom P.H., ADR-the opiate of the legal system?, Eur. Rev. Priv. Law, 16, (2008)
[6] Lindblom P.H., Grupptalan i Sverige. Bakgrund och kommentarer till lagen om grupprättegång (Group actions in Sweden. Background and Commentaries to the Swedish Group proceedings Act of 2002), (2008)
[7] Lindblom P.H., Grupptalan. En studie av det Anglo-Amerikanska class actioninstitutet ur svenskt perspektiv (Group actions. The Anglo-American class action suit from a Swedish perspective), with a summary in English, (1989)
[8] Lindblom P.H., Individual litigation and mass justice: a Swedish proposal on group actions in civil procedure, Am. J. Comp. Law, 45, (1997)
[9] Lindblom P.H., Lagen om grupprättegång-bakgrund och framtid (The Group Proceedings Act-Background and Future) Svensk Juristtidning, (2005)
[10] Lindblom P.H., The growing role of the courts and the new functions of judicial process-fact of flummery?, Procedural Law-Court Administrations. Scandinavian Studies in Law, 51, pp. 281-310, (2007)

← 1 2 →