The new directive on an EU-wide representative action and third-party litigation funding: An opportunity for European consumers?

After years of compensatory collective redress being left to a sort of regulatory competition among Member States, Directive 1828/2020 finally introduced an EU wide representative action scheme, aimed at strengthening the position of European consumers vis-à-vis new market dynamics such as globalisation and digitalisation. The new system, which shall run in parallel with national tools, introduces some innovations such as a cross-border action mechanism, the possibility of adopting an opt-out model and a specific regulation of third-party litigation funding in the context of collective redress. This aspect, addressed already in the 2013 Recommendation, is of particular interest, because third party funding represents a particularly powerful complement to collective redress in easing citizens' access to justice. However, the provisions introduced with Directive 1828/2020 leave some issues open. In particular, the Court's role in managing the funding agreement, with special reference to the funder's fee, and the effect of the funding agreement in case an opt-out adhesion mechanism is adopted are of paramount importance and still need to be addressed interpretatively. In this task, the comparative method will be particularly helpful in analysing the solution which Countries more familiar with third party funding, like Australia, Canada or the United States have introduced or discussed.

Third party funding and access to justice

The purpose of this paper to analyze whether and to what extent are third-party funding and access to justice intertwined and compatible. The analysis started from recognizing most common challenges with third-party funding and whether these challenges may be overcome with existing regulation and guidelines. Global lack of regulation of this subject is noticeable. This increases the risks of having undisclosed conflict of interests between various participants and affects the confidentiality, efficiency and fairness of the proceedings and ultimately the access to justice considerations. Although third party funding undoubtedly contributes to larger access to justice, an unregulated market of this kind may also draw adverse inference to the access to justice. In conclusion, authors of this paper call for wider regulation of this matter, including both through local legislation and arbitration rules.

Civil disputes as a consequence of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly brought and has still been bringing a number of changes to national legal regimes concerning civil disputes. In addition to the tremendous increase in the number of civil disputes, there are also specific legal areas in which these disputes arise as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common civil disputes arising from such circumstances concern employment relationships, cancelled travel arrangements, delays in fulfilling contractual obligations, but also compensation for damage caused by the COVID-19 infection. Various frameworks in which infection with COVID-19 can occur, such as organized trips, visits to restaurants, large events, but also visits to hospitals due to medical treatment require an attempt to respond on issues of potential claims for compensation for damage resulting from failure to act. However, the focus of our attention is on cases of compensation for damage suffered due to corona virus infection. In addition, it is interesting and challenging to focus on a group action (ger. Sammelklage) lawsuit for COVID-19 infection in the Austrian ski resort of Ischgl.

Blockchain as a method of resolving hold-up problem

The hold-up problem is a form of opportunistic behavior of contractual partners. It occurs when the optimal volume and structure of transactions cannot be defined with ex ante certainty. The consequence of the hold-up problem is that, once a contractual relationship has been established, one of the parties seeks to modify the distribution of benefits in such a way that it has a higher level of profit from the contract than is justified by the contractual investments it has made. The paper examines the potential of the Blockchain concept to, applied as a framework of "smart" contracts, contribute to the elimination or reduce opportunities for the emergence of a hold-up situation. The Blockchain concept with its characteristics (transparency, protection of data integrity, shareability) deploys the foregoing potential in three ways: by witnessing the transaction via the Blockchain; ensuring the execution of a (by Blockchain certified) transaction; by verifying transactions through a decentralized system that replaces verification by third parties (courts or arbitration). Consequently, the Blockchain concept for storing and managing information substitutes the role played by the institute of trust in the classical ("analog") legal relationship.

Reform of key interest rates on the money market and some implications for credit markets

Ongoing reform of key interest rates on the money market is one of the most significant events on financial markets in the world. This is due to the fact that most of the LIBOR rates in different currencies will be discontinued at the end of 2021. Cessation of LIBOR after a number of scandals following emerging global financial crisis in 2008 lead to existence of more benchmark rates constructed as risk-free rates based on transactions, from SOFR in the U.S.A. to SARON in Switzerland. Intention of EU regulators is to replace EURIBOR with ESTR in the future so that ESTR becomes benchmark for EU and EFTA. The last analysis of lenders and borrowers' positions indicates that EURIBOR is satisfactory reformed based on the fact that in its determination data about transaction and expert judgment are included. According to the current prevailed thinking in the banking industry EURIBOR could be continually used. True, not necessarily on the derivatives market, but certainly on the credit and mortgage markets which are particularly related to EURIBOR in eurozone.

The role of ex aequo et bono in ICSID arbitration

This article examines the role of the principle of ex aequo et bono in arbitration before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). At the outset, the author remarks that the cases in which the application of ex aequo et bono was agreed upon by the parties are very scarce. Nevertheless, despite that scarcity, it is possible to draw some conclusions on the way in which equity was invoked by the parties and applied by the ICSID tribunals. Two scenarios are analyzed in particular: the use of ex aequo et bono as the applicable framework for dispute settlement and the reliance on ex aequo et bono in an attempt to nullify the award before an ad hoc Committee. The author concludes that the reluctance of the parties to agree on ex aequo et bono may be explained by the lack of predictability of outcomes that is inherent to this source of law. On the contrary, it might be expected that the parties will continue trying to come up with creative arguments aimed at proving the unauthorized application of ex aequo et bono by the tribunals in their attempts to annul the awards on the basis of excess of powers.

Burden of proof and lack of conformity under the CISG from the Italian law perspective

The article studies the interaction between the model of sale and purchase provided by the CISG and that of the Italian Civil Code. This is done with a twofold purpose to verify: a) whether, as things stand, the applicability of the domestic law legislation or of the general principles governing the CISG is indifferent in relation to the burden of proof concerning the lack of conformity, and consequently also to the debate concerning whether this aspect is of a procedural or substantive nature; b) whether this burden of proof can move independently of the subjective or objective conception of performance and of whether the seller's performance is associated with an obligation or a guarantee.

Macroeconomics and political misuse: Interpreting economic policy

The paper focuses the impact of political abuse of economic policy on macroeconomic results, as well as the macroeconomic models that investigate this impact. The paper also presents the development of modern macroeconomics, along with main changes in the way of creating economic policy. Two key political motives - opportunistic (to stay in power as long as possible) and partisan - to achieve ideological goals in the field of economics, are considered in the context of traditional models that assume naive voters and adaptive expectations, but also in the context of rational models that include rational voters and expectations. The paper also gives certain recommendations for overcoming the politically motivated behavior of economic policymakers.

The ECJ's Coman judgment: Recognition of same-sex marriage indirectly?

In the Coman case, the European Court of Justice was asked whether the term "spouse" - for the purpose of EU law - includes the same-sex spouse of an EU citizen who has moved between EU Member States. The ECJ answered this question affirmatively, holding that a refusal to recognise a same-sex marriage and the resultant refusal to grant family reunification rights to a Union citizen who moves to another Member State, would constitute an unjustified restriction on the right to free movement that Union citiyens enjoy under EU law. This case comment analyses the judgment, arguing that the Court's pronouncement is a very welcome first step towards marriage equality at a cross-border level in the EU. At the same time, the case poses a number of important questions, which will only be answered in case law and practice in the years to come.

Economic performances of the tax system of Serbia

Impact of the tax system on economic growth depends on the level of tax burden, its structure and the parameterization of main taxes. With the acceleration of the process of transition to a market economy, since 2001, Serbia has carried out a fundamental reform of its tax system, which has undergone a number of further changes in the past two decades. Serbia's tax system generates tax revenues of about 37% of GDP, which is below the average of the European Union (EU) countries, but moderately higher than the average of comparable countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Western Balkans. Empirical research shows that capital taxes (corporate income tax) and labor taxes (personal income tax and contributions) have a significantly greater negative impact on economic growth than consumption taxes (VAT, excise duties and customs duties) and property taxes. This suggests that the level of tax burden in Serbia may have a negative impact, while the structure of the tax system having a relatively positive impact on the conditions for economic growth. Harmonization of Serbia's tax system with EU rules is expected to increase the relative importance of selective consumption (Pigovian) taxes, which could create fiscal space to reduce more distorting taxes (e.g. on labor), which could yield a positive impact on the conditions for economic growth.