首页> 外文期刊>European Business Organization Law Review >Investor Protection Through Model Case Procedures -Implementing Collective Goals and Individual Rights Under the 2012 Amendment to the German Capital Markets Model Case Act (KapMuG)
【24h】

Investor Protection Through Model Case Procedures -Implementing Collective Goals and Individual Rights Under the 2012 Amendment to the German Capital Markets Model Case Act (KapMuG)

机译:通过示范案例程序保护投资者-根据2012年德国资本市场示范案例法(KapMuG)修正案实现集体目标和个人权利

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Model case procedures have some fundamentals in common with collective redress in civil law countries. This is particularly true in the field of investor protection. This area is highly regulated and marked by resulting enforcement failures, which led the German legislator to the enactment of the KapMuG and its recent amendment, highlighting exemplary elements of model case procedures. A survey of the ongoing activities of the European Union in the area of collective redress and of its repercussions at Member State level therefore forms a suitable basis for the following analysis of the 2012 amendment to the KapMuG. It clearly brings into focus a shift from sector-specific regulation with an emphasis on the cross-border aspect of protecting consumers, towards a 'coherent approach' strengthening the enforcement of EU law. As a result, today, regulatory policy and collective redress are two sides of the same coin. With respect to the KapMuG, such a development brings about some tension between its aim to aggregate small individual claims as efficiently as possible and the dominant role of individual procedural rights in German civil procedure. This conflict can be illustrated by some specific elements of the KapMuG: its scope of application; the three-tier structure of a model case procedure; the newly introduced notification of claims; and the new opt-out settlement under amended §§ 17-19.
机译:示范案例程序与民法国家的集体补救有一些共同点。在保护投资者领域尤其如此。该领域受到严格的监管,并因由此导致的执法失误而成为标志,这导致德国立法者制定了KapMuG及其最新修正案,突出了示范案例程序的示范性要素。因此,对欧洲联盟在集体补救方面的现行活动及其在成员国一级的影响进行的调查构成了以下分析2012年对KapMuG修正案的适当基础。它显然将重点从从针对特定部门的监管转移到强调保护欧盟法律执行的“连贯方法”,从侧重于保护消费者的跨境方面。结果,今天,监管政策和集体救济是同一事物的两个方面。关于KapMuG,这种发展在其尽可能有效地汇总小额个人索赔的目的与个人程序权利在德国民事诉讼程序中的主导作用之间造成了某种张力。 KapMuG的一些特定元素可以说明这种冲突:其适用范围;模型案例过程的三层结构;新引入的索赔通知;以及经修订的第§§19-19条规定的新的退出协议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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