Article 21—Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure

2021 ◽  
pp. 393-399
Author(s):  
Eleonora Rosati
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Member States ◽  
Adjustment Mechanism

This chapter deals with the alternative dispute resolution procedure outlined in Article 21 of the copyright order in Europe, Directive 2019/790. It examines disputes concerning the transparency obligation and the contract adjustment mechanism that may be applied for a voluntary, alternative dispute resolution procedure. It also refers to Member States that are required to ensure that representative organisations of authors and performers may initiate dispute resolution procedures at the specific request of one or more authors or performers. The chapter explains why authors and performers are often reluctant to enforce their rights against their contractual partners before a court or tribunal. It looks at the task of Member States to provide for an alternative dispute resolution procedure that addresses claims by authors and performers, or by their representatives on their behalf, related to obligations of transparency and the contract adjustment mechanism.

Article 23—Common Provisions

2021 ◽  
pp. 408-408
Author(s):  
Eleonora Rosati
Keyword(s):  
Computer Program ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Member States ◽  
Adjustment Mechanism ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

This chapter covers the common provisions in Article 23 of the copyright order in Europe, Directive 2019/790. It refers to Member States that are required to ensure that any contractual provision that prevents compliance with the transparency obligation and contract adjustment mechanism will be unenforceable in relation to authors and performers. It also looks at the legislation that causes non-compliance with the alternative dispute resolution procedure. The chapter points out that the provisions on the right of revocation do not apply to authors of a computer program within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2009/24/EC on the legal protection of computer programs. It emphasizes that the principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration in Article 18 of Directive 2019/790 do not affect individuals involved in computer programs.

scholarly journals The Damages Directive and Consensual Approach to Antitrust Enforcement

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 181-194
Author(s):  
Raimundas Moisejevas
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Mediation Process ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Costs ◽  
To Receive ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Consensual Approach

The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts

scholarly journals Alternative Methods of Collective Disputes Resolution in the Czech Republic

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 96-116
Author(s):  
Klára Hamuľáková ◽  
Jana Petrov Křiváčková
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Environment Protection ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Collective Redress

Abstract On 11 June 2013, the Commission issued the Recommendation on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning the violations of rights granted under Union law. The main areas where private enforcement of rights granted under Union law in the form of collective redress is of value are consumer protection, competition, environment protection, protection of personal data, financial services legislation and protection of investments. Point 13 of the Recommendation concurrently emphasises that the principles it puts forward relate both to judicial and out-of-court collective redress. The Member States should ensure that judicial collective redress mechanisms are accompanied by appropriate means of collective alternative dispute resolution available to the parties before and throughout the litigation. Point 25 et seq. of the Recommendation then contains special regulations concerning collective alternative dispute resolution and settlements. The purpose of this article is to evaluate if the current legislation on alternative dispute resolution in the Czech Republic meets the principles encompassed in the Recommendation or if radical legal changes need to be adopted.

scholarly journals MEDIATION IN RESOLVING CONSUMER DISPUTES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR - OVERVIEW OF FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND OPPORTUNITIES BEFORE THE BULGARIAN MODEL

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanislava Kasikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Eu Member States

This article aims to present the legal framework governing the establishment of consumer dispute resolution bodies in Bulgaria and other EU member states, as well as to analyze what should be the place of mediation as a way of alternative dispute resolution. (ADR) in resolving conflicts between traders and consumers.

scholarly journals Promoting Democracy through the Work of the EU Ombudsman

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-16
Author(s):  
Reka Friedery
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Direct Link ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The EU is in an economic, social and political crisis, and there are vital expectations to enhance and restore trust, openness and transparency. The EU bodies which bring the EU and its citizens closer to each other gain even more importance. This paper will demonstrate that alternative dispute-resolution forums, like the office of the EU Ombudsman, have a multidirectional function. It was established to strengthen the fundamental rights of citizens and to enhance a more citizen- -friendly EU administration. The analysis highlights the forum’s importance in changing horizontal relations between different stakeholders into vertical during its procedure, for instance between EU institutions and EU citizens. The presentation of research explores these relations by analysing complaint cases and the EU Ombudsman-related cases of the CJEU. The paper argues that the right to complain to the EU Ombudsman, who is a direct link between EU institutions and EU citizens, and the potential of changing the above-mentioned functions, can strengthen the trust of Member States’ citizens and help them identify as European citizens. The cornerstone of this argument are the relations between the EU citizens, institutions and the Ombudsman.

scholarly journals MEDIATION IN RESOLVING CONSUMER DISPUTES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR - OVERVIEW OF FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND OPPORTUNITIES BEFORE THE BULGARIAN MODEL

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanislava Kasikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Eu Member States

This article aims to present the legal framework governing the establishment of consumer dispute resolution bodies in Bulgaria and other EU member states, as well as to analyze what should be the place of mediation as a way of alternative dispute resolution. (ADR) in resolving conflicts between traders and consumers.

ASAS KEPASTIAN HUKUM DAN ASAS KEBEBASAN BERKONTRAK SEBAGAI PERTIMBANGAN UTAMA DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PERBANKAN SYARIAH (Kajian Yuridis Putusan MK Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012)

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Edi Hudiata
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Islamic Banking ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Ideal Norm ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Binding Force

Since the verdict of the Constitutional Court (MK) Number 93/PUU-X/2012 pronounced on Thursday, August 29, 2013, concerning the judicial review of Law No. 21 of 2008 on Islamic Banking, it is no longer dualism dispute resolution. The verdict as well as strengthen the jurisdiction of Religious Court to resolve Islamic banking disputes. In consideration of the judges, judges agreed stating that Article 55 paragraph (2) and (3) of Law No. 21 of 2008 which is an ideal norm, contains no constitutional problems. The problem is the explanation of the constitutional article 55 paragraph (2) of the Act. The emergence of the Constitutional Court verdict No. 93/PUU-X/2012 which substantially states that the explanation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law No. 21 of 2008 does not have binding force, basically does not violate the principle of freedom of contract which is common in contract law. The parties are allowed to make a dispute resolution agreement out of religious court based on provisions as Act No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Keywords: dispute resolution, legal certainty and the principle of freedom of contract

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document