The class action
In some American film, a certain lawyer collects a huge number of signatures in the United States and then sues, one cause, a "major", that is, to a large U.S. company, even multinational. Also in American films, the lawyer down the giant and justice triumphs.
A great country like that, especially based on liberal principles in economics, does not tolerate the presence of business malpractice. After all, the liberal theory is denoted by this: it is important to directly create a social system in which citizens are better, but it is essential to eliminate the economic stage companies that are inefficient or unfair, because, only then, according to this theory, Citizens and businesses can feel better, do not it will have to bear the burden, the cost. If only someone in Italy had never groped wanted to create a pale imitation of this frictional, should have been allowed to fail companies such as Alitalia and Fiat, example, but only as absolutely incomplete.
Like it or not, the philosophy espoused by this system has produced a series of remedies direct and indirect, public and private, through which American society as a whole, it defends against inefficiency, misconduct by, the monopoly (considered that the black beast, blasphemy economic). Between the private and indirect remedies against the unfairness of the U.S. banking system, which tends to sign (that is, make backroom deals and uniform interest rates faking a competition, but actually exercising an oligopoly) about 100 years ago, there were invented the modern mutual funds: groups of investors who ran professionally and independently of their savings, obtaining a better and safer performance against the banks, in competition with banks. Today, the U.S. funds collect more savings in the banking system and guarantee social security benefits the entire American system. The Italian funds, however, are owned by the banks ... But let's leave and return to the theme.
How many of us do not happen to discover a small inaccuracy, a small impropriety, on one bill for gas, water, electricity, telephone? But even some minor misconduct in insurance policies, contracts of the bank. I know, the discovery of additional costs compared to those stated in the contracts, abrupt termination of a benefit, an advantage of established in the contract. Now, of course, one was hurt, maybe curse the system. But he would never occur to sue a bank, its because the last statement, unintelligible, we have seen charge, for example, an electronic charge that he had not agreed, nor was deducted from the contract, 's amount of EUR 1.
Who would be so wicked to risk so much for so little?
Well, in America, it is possible, through a lawyer, bring together all those who have a small or big problem, and to sue the cunning, together with a radical reduction of legal costs, even a simple symbolic presence of a cost that is often advanced by the same law firm. And so, for real and not just in the movies, economic giants have been folded.
The class action, so called, was introduced in Italy. Hooray, hooray, hooray!
Calma.
not like the American one. Here we want to "cautiously". The expression in quotes is not mine, I borrowed by Directive 27,064 of the President of the Council of Ministers of 12 March 2007.
Here, citizens are protected, they need a guardian to decide whether to sue collectively.
Here in Italy to be able to class action will not be citizens but consumer groups.
Hooray, hooray, hooray! It takes, we make a consumer organization and we do it yourself ready for battle against the wind mills.
And no, no, consumer groups must be relevant at the national level.
And if one wanted to take it public or private company with a regional, I say, the atomic waste water atheism? Nothing to do. It must take a national association, registered in a register.
someone already knows most critical: national consumer groups are not entirely independent of political parties and social (political parties and trade unions).
Here in Italy from the right and left are all liberals, liberals and libertarians. Do you think, the most left-wing, neo-Keynesian propose solutions to cure the country: more public investment to stimulate domestic domada ... right ones, however, offer economic protectionism. In a reverse logic is a disturbing exchange of roles: some are part of others, but the theater is always liberal. Liberal, with due caution, of course.
But now, you have to do a little reasoning, but there was already a class action in Italy? Introduced in 1998 and then reformed in 2003 and again in 2005 and again after. Of course at that time was not called class action, but he was in the Code of consumption, and stipulated that the associations (of consumers and users) could take legal action to protect the collective interests.
But then, what is the difference?
are the same individuals (consumers 'associations and users' representative at national level) that have the same power of the case (to start legal proceedings), but with greater amplitude.
In fact, consumer groups, first, could only initiate action interim injunction, which is intended to stop, block, and an overall incorrect. Today, however, the same associations have the power to sue too smart-large-entities-corporations just like individuals, without limitation, it would seem, therefore, with the possibility of even order them to pay damages, for example. And this is no small thing.
remains to understand why this line of defense against improper activities (which ultimately affect portfolios, health and welfare of society as a whole) should be operated only by associations (consumers and users) that are relevant at the national level. But why citizens should necessarily register as a group, be part of it, to have the illusion of security? And yes, we should speak of illusion why subscribe to a consumer association does not guarantee that this begins a case against someone. The power to decide lies with the governing boards of associations, certainly not to the members. Otherwise if I could give a mandate to a lawyer for a collective action, collective action would be, there are certain assumptions.
Among these I would put first the merits of the question, then, in the case of collective action, we should have a reasonable number of principals. And the point is this: who decides what is the minimum number in order to speak of a collective action? Italiot The solution is to rely on well-established pre-existing national associations. But elsewhere, to establish a minimum number is, first, a judge. The reason for this court is simple: first, the judge, by definition, is neutral, impartial, and second, the court from time to time depending upon the interest or right that you claim has been infringed, depending on the geographic area within which the subject-mischievous misuse, and, depending on its size, lays down minimum requirements different from case to case. All this seems very sensible.
very little sense, however, appears to entrust the protection of important rights and interests and only to a possible arbitrary action by an association that is neither neutral nor impartial and whose number of members has not only nationally and locally. With all of the paradoxical results obtained from this paradoxical situation of departure. But does anyone remember if since 1998 there was a legal action (even if only inhibitory) associations of consumers against someone important by, say, electricity, telecom, national banks, investment funds?
There is however, the same provision, which introduced the class action we are talking about a standard that allows also to associations and committees other than those represented at the national level, the ability to sue but not to pursue the injunction. The provision specifies that they must be adequately representative associations and committees of the collective interests asserted. It says nothing on the basis of an association or committee that is adequately representative. In particular, it says nothing of 'territorial scope of representation: representing locally, regionally representative, nationally representative?
If the counterparty is a subject of national importance, the committee or the association must be the same level, or it can be local, in short, a local committee may be due to Telecom? If it is possible, if the committee or association is a local promoter and the national counterpart is, for example, when the local promoter and properly represented? When and why is configurable a locus standi? So how does a judge to give reasons for the lack of locus standi?
A possible interpretation, only a hypothesis, could be acquired from some interpretation by analogy.
absence of a rule, we resort to the most similar. The most similar is that relating to the representative associations at national level. To be representative at national level an association must have a number of members equal to 0.5 per thousand of the national population and must be present in at least five regions or autonomous provinces. Going from a national to a local geographical area, similarly, one could assume for example, for a province that a committee or association should have a number of members equal to 0.5 per thousand of the registered population in the Province. If the population of the province was than 220,000 inhabitants would then have 110 members. And a local presence for one quarter of the municipalities of the Province, then, if the municipalities were 20, 5 municipalities, and in each of these five municipalities a number of members not less than 0.2 per thousand. Then, again hypothetically, in a municipality of 20,000 inhabitants at least 4 members. A greater number of members representative of each parameter corresponds to a greater degree of representativeness of the association or the local committee. In a more restricted geographical area (municipal association or committee) succeed zones or districts of the city. And in a more extended (the region) provinces. In a field units that make up the consortium.
The point, however, that seems to be the premise and the consequence of the problematic nature is always the same: you have wanted to entrust to a collective entity (Association representative at the national level, associations and committees nationally-representative, but not included in official national representative locally and not included in the National Journal, but it is one possible interpretation-) the power to promote a class action.
We can bet that the uncertainty about these delicate issues will lead to an extension by Parliament pending clarification of authentic interpretation, or we will have to wait some years before the Supreme Court or the Court Constitutional disband these nodes.
Back to the Home Page
0 comments:
Post a Comment