首页> 外文期刊>Pravoprimenenie >Коллективная правовая защита – иски объединений и право объединений на предъявление иска в немецком гражданском процессе
【24h】

Коллективная правовая защита – иски объединений и право объединений на предъявление иска в немецком гражданском процессе

机译:集体法律保护 - 协会索赔和协会关于在德国民事化进程提出索赔的权利

获取原文
       

摘要

The subject. The article is devoted to problems of institute of collective legal protection in German civil procedure law. The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove hypothesis of the need to introduce the institution of general class action in German civil procedural law. The methodology of the study includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, description) and sociological approach. The main results and scope of their application. German civil procedure law is based on the principle of "two parties". However, there are many situations that do not fit into the traditional scheme of individual legal protection, because either the conflict is affected by many persons, or the conflict goes beyond the individual interests of the affected persons. For processes in which a significant number of persons are involved, as a means of protection, first of all, claims for abstention from actions (Unterlassungsklagen) submitted by associations of consumers and entrepreneurs are offered. These claims, in spite of the dogmatic difficulties, have been implemented in practice and proven. Special legal regulation on this issue exists in the legislation on consumer protection, competition and Antimonopoly legislation. Added to this are the more recently the claims of the unions about the withdrawal of the profits (Verbandsklagen auf Gewinnabsch?pfung). The claim for recovery (Einziehungsklage), which allows associations to join several unidirectional claims of consumers in a single lawsuit, is also regulated in a special way. However, there is still no General class action in German law. Conclusions. The author concludes that the absence of a General class action is a legal gap in German civil procedure law. This situation is criticized as insufficient to raise the issue of causing mass harm before the court. First of all, there is the absence of a collective action aimed at compensating for harm, which is regarded as alien to German law. The relevant initiatives of the European Commission in this regard contain only non-binding recommendations to States parties on the introduction of collective forms of legal protection. This topic becomes even more relevant in Germany in connection with the "diesel scandal" and the introduction of the bill on a collective model claim for recognition (Musterfeststellungsklage).
机译:主题。本文致力于德国民事诉讼法中集体法律保护研究所问题。本文的目的是确认或反驳假设需要在德国民事诉讼法中介绍一般阶级行动机构的必要性。该研究的方法包括一般科学方法(分析,综合,描述)和社会学方法。他们申请的主要结果和范围。德国民事诉讼法是基于“双方”的原则。但是,许多情况不适于对个人法律保护的传统方案,因为冲突受许多人的影响,或者冲突超出了受影响人员的个人利益。对于其中涉及大量人员的过程,作为保护手段,首先,提供了消费者和企业家协会提交的行动(Unterlassungsklagen)的索赔。尽管有教条困难,这些权利要求在实践中实施并经过验证。在消费者保护,竞争和反垄断法立法的立法中存在对此问题的特殊法律规定。添加到这是最近近期关于撤离利润的联盟的索赔(Verbandsklagen Auf Gewinnabsch?pfung)。恢复索赔(Einziehungsklage),允许协会在一个诉讼中加入几个消费者的单一单向声明,也以特殊的方式调节。但是,德国法律仍然没有一般阶级行动。结论。作者得出结论,缺乏一般阶级行动是德国民事诉讼法的法律差距。这种情况受到批评,不足以提出在法庭前造成群众伤害的问题。首先,缺乏旨在赔偿伤害的集体行动,被认为是德国法律的外星人。欧洲委员会在这方面的有关举措仅向缔约国缔约国延伸了缔约国的法律保护的缔约国。与“柴油丑闻”有关德国的这一主题在德国方面变得更加相关,并在识别的集体模型索赔中引入账单(Musterfeststellungsklage)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号