Search results

Abstract: This contribution looks into the goal of the Proposal for a European directive on consumer rights as published by the European Commission on 8 October 2008. It specifically questions the European Commission's ambition to turn consumer law into an area suited for full harmonization: is it really true that consumer law should be almost exclusively a European competence (as the Commission seems to suggest by proposing maximum harmonization in some important areas of consumer law) and no longer one shared by the EU and the Member States? The adoption of the Consumer rights proposal would mean that the national legislatures and courts are no longer competent in setting diverging rules. This far-reaching consequence justifi es the question of what is the best level of regulating consumer protection. It is argued that this is dependent on a number of factors and that the Commission's approach to fully harmonize this area because of the mere fact that it is about consumer protection is not adequate.
Zusammenfassung: Dieser Beitrag untersucht das Ziel des Vorschlages für eine Europäische Richtlinie über Rechte des Verbrauchers, der von der Europäischen Kommission am 8. Oktober 2008 veröffentlicht wurde. Insbesondere soll mit dem Beitrag das Bestreben der Europäischen Kommission in Zweifel gezogen werden, nachdem das Verbraucherrecht ein Rechtsgebiet darstellen soll, das für die Vollharmonisierung geeignet ist. Sollte das Verbraucherrecht tatsächlich fast ausschließlich in einen europäischen Kompetenzbereich fallen (wie die Europäische Kommission anscheinend mit Einführung der Vollharmonisierung in einigen wichtigen Gebieten des Verbraucherrechts andeutet) und nicht mehr einen Bereich darstellen, in dem die Gesetzgebungsbefugnis sowohl bei der Europäischen Union als auch bei den Mitgliedstaaten liegt? Die Annahme des Richtlinienentwurfs über Rechte des Verbrauchers würde zur Folge haben, dass die nationalen Gesetzgeber sowie die nationalen Gerichte keine Kompetenz mehr hätten gegensätzliche Regelungen auf diesen Rechtsgebiet einzuführen. Diese weitreichende Folge rechtfertigt die Frage nach dem besten Grad der Regelung des Verbraucherrechts. Es wird erörtert, dass dieses von einer Reihe von Faktoren abhängig ist und dass der Ansatz der Europäischen Kommission, nachdem die Vollharmonisierung nur mit dem Vorliegen des Verbraucherschutzes begründet wird, verfehlt ist.

Verbraucherschutz und Verbraucherrechte in Estland, Lettland und Litauen.

In recognition of the concept of consumer rights to trial, individual and collective consumer rights should be extended across Europe as well as nationally. The need to affirm the procedural position of the so-called vulnerable parties in civil law proceedings is a complex and multifaceted matter. The Polish legislator having devised new separate proceedings in consumer cases is a manifestation of the equalising justice principle having been realised. Regardless, one may well doubt whether the current procedural form comprises a sufficient volume of significant deviations from ordinary proceedings to justify such nature to be conferred upon it. Related deliberations form part of a broader discussion regarding the structure, form, and suitability of Polish procedural law.

The 2008 proposal for a Directive on Consumer Rights (hereinafter: the Draft) aims at reorganizing the acquis of four specific European directives on consumer protection into a more coherent codification of consumer rights. Specifically, it contains rules on precontractual information duties, on withdrawal rights for distance and off-premises contracts, on consumer sales and on general contract terms in consumer contracts. In replacing the four directives with a minimum harmonization character, the Draft marks a further step towards full harmonization of consumer contract law in Europe. This is an unsettling step because the level of protection offered to consumers in the Draft hardly exceeds the level of protection offered by the four directives mentioned earlier. Instead, it diminishes this protection in some regards. In light of all this, the question arises whether the policy choices underlying the Draft are, in fact, convincingly underpinned by solid argumentation. This article addresses this issue by first analyzing the Draft's use of the generic concept of "contracts between consumers and traders". It is argued that full harmonization of a badly delineated territory is ill-advised. Subsequently, the argumentative power of the policy considerations forwarded by the European Commission in its Regulatory Assessment Study is tested. The article concludes that the Commission's assessment of expected costs and benefits of the Draft is waver-thin and geared towards persuading the reader of the aptness of choices already made. In some respects, the evidence presented by the Commission is outright unconvincing. At certain points, the Draft even fuels the reader's suspicion of foregone conclusions. Overall, the need for reduction of the level of protection offered by the current minimum harmonization directives is poorly argued by the Commission and appears, in a number of important ways, not to reflect the socio-economic relationships that exist in at least some of the Member States.

Abstract: The author asserts that the proposal for a new horizontal directive on consumer rights offers no substantial improvements to consumer protection while the full harmonization clause of the proposal will result in a reduced level of protection in all Member States. Surprisingly, the proposal makes little use of the terminology of the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR).
Resumé : L'auteur estime que la proposition de directive horizontale relative aux droits des consommateurs n'apporte aucune amélioration notable à la protection des consommateurs. Au contraire, l'harmonisation complète prévue par cette directive aura pour conséquence de réduire leur niveau de protection actuel dans tous les États membres. Étonnamment, la proposition de directive s'inspire très peu de la terminologie employée par le projet de cadre commun de référence.
Zusammenfassung: Der Autor stellt fest, dass der Vorschlag für eine neue horizontale Verbraucherrechtsrichtlinie keine wesentlichen Verbesserungen des Verbraucherschutzes bewirkt. Die Vollharmonisierung führt vielmehr zu einer Absenkung des Verbraucherschutzniveaus in allen Mitgliedsstaaten. Überraschenderweise nimmt der Vorschlag wenig Bezug auf die Terminologie des Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR).

For many years, the trend of legislation has been piecemeal with a fusion of the rules of laws for the protection of consumer and non-consumer buyers. However, the complexity of accessing the fragmented laws and their unsuitability in dealing with contemporary consumers issues have led to the adoption of a Consumer Protection Policy 2014 with the primary object of providing a consumer tailored regime for the protection of consumers in Ghana. While the adopted 2014 Policy document is currently before the Attorney General Department to be drafted into a Bill for Parliament consideration, the present article appraises the comprehensiveness of the existing law and the adopted Consumer Protection Policy 2014 in effectively responding to the problems of consumers in Ghana. This is explored in comparison with the approach of the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 while bearing in mind the peculiar circumstances in Ghana. This article argues that whereas the effort of the government is so far commendable, there are noticeable unresolved consumer concerns. Of particular concern is consolidating the laws on consumer contracts and coverage of the law on the supply of services to consumers. This paper, therefore, submits that addressing these concerns is vital to ensuring that consumers are provided with a comprehensive and effective regime in Ghana.