Joint Business Statement on the Proposal on Representative Actions (Collective Redress)

EJF, alongside several other associations, signed a joint statement on the Proposal on Representative Actions.

This statement sets out the concerns of the business community regarding the report voted in the Legal Affairs (JURI) committee of the European Parliament. Please click here to access the joint statement.



JOINT STATEMENT - The European Commission’s proposal risks undermining civil justice systems to the detriment of consumers across Europe

The European Justice Forum is joining forces with various business associations to stress key concerns regarding the European Commission’s proposal for a directive on representative actions. Click here to have a look at our joint statement explaining why the Commission’s proposal risks undermining civil justice systems to the detriment of consumers across Europe


EJF position paper - Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers

The European Justice Forum (EJF) calls on EU institutions to shape a fair, balanced and efficient civil justice system for dealing with mass consumer complaints in Europe. Playing by the rules is a common interest shared by consumers and business.

Click here to access EJF's position paper.


The Commission proposal on collective redress is unbalanced and misses the opportunity of effectively improving consumer's access to justice

Following the release of the New Deal for Consumers package and of the Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, Ekkart Kaske, Executive Director of the European Justice Forum, has declared:

“We regard this proposal as being several steps backwards from the position advocated by the European Commission in its own reasonably well-balanced recommendations on collective redress issued in 2013. We are concerned that the new proposal might have been driven more by a political desire to react to the Dieselgate experience, rather than by the principles of Better Regulation adopted by the European Commission.”

 While the European Justice Forum understands and appreciates the efforts of the European Commission to provide answers to consumers who suffer torts, we are deeply concerned with the solution proposed, which tries to find a simplistic solution for a complex problem. We regret to see that the proposal encourages collective actions in court, instead of envisaging this as a last resort and offering better alternatives such as regulatory redress and Alternative Dispute Mechanisms. We are also concerned by the lack of sufficient safeguards included in the proposal, which ignores the very principles enshrined in the 2013 Recommendation. The current proposal does not provide sufficient guarantees on a number of fundamental aspects, including funding, qualified entities and the opt-in principle. We also see a serious risk of forum shopping both between public and private qualified entities and also between different Member States, since the proposal does not provide sufficient harmonisation.

In sum, the current proposal misses an important opportunity to effectively improve consumers' access to justice by providing timely, affordable and efficient out-of-court redress solutions.

We need to have a thoroughly evidence-based approach” – said Mr Kaske, adding that – “EJF is ready to put the Association’s decade-long comparative research experience in assessing collective redress instruments across Europe at the service of the European institutions. In the interest of consumers, let's work together towards a fair, effective and well-balanced collective redress mechanism​”.


For more information, please contact:


2017 Malcolm Carlisle Memorial Lecture

The 2017 Malcolm Carlisle Memorial Lecture was organised by the Association of British Healthcare Industries (ABHI), co-sponsored by European Justice Forum and MedTech Europe, on 1 June 2017. This year, Professor Christopher Hodges, Professor of Justice Systems at Oxford University and Fellow of Wolfson College, addressed fundamental and significant changes which are due to take place in the next few years concerning the way in which all aspects of regulation are enforced across industry and society at large. He also explained how the application of regulation must become more cooperative between regulator and regulated, how government as part of this trend will seek to recover the cost of regulation in fees, and how business can both minimize its costs and benefit from the new regime. Finally, he outlined a possible role for Industry Associations in supporting an essential element of the new approach of 'self-assurance in regulation'. You can view his full presentation via this link.