European Small Claims Procedure: An Effective Process? A Proposal for an Online Platform
Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. European Small Claims Procedure. – 2.1. Civil court proceedings and small claims in the Portuguese environment. - 2.2 Some unresolved procedural issues in small claims – the role of internal systems and their different solutions. – 2.3. The weak points of small claims. - 3. An Online Platform for Small Claims Procedure – A Proposal. - 3.1. Management and administration of the European Small Claims Platform and national entities. – 3.2 Procedure: stages and platform functions. – 4. Conclusions.
Abstract
AJEE Collection of Articles on Small Claims
Statistics concerning the use of the European Small Claims Procedure implemented by Regulation 861/2007 (as amended by Regulation 2015/2421) show that this mechanism has not been as successful as expected. When choosing between a domestic and a European instrument, the creditor most often opts for the domestic procedure. They avoid an instrument that is less well known, that they do not fully manage, and that has limited integration in domestic law.
This article starts with the legislative analysis of the European Regulation 861/2007, using analytical and hermeneutic approaches. Empirical methodologies will also be applied since the practical application of the rules established by the European Regulation will be analysed in order to build the proposal of an online platform for the small claims procedure.
Bearing in mind the weaknesses of the European Small Claims Procedure, we conclude that an online platform incorporating alternative dispute resolution mechanisms is the best option to promote access to justice. A list of arbitrators or judges designated by each member state to decide the cases submitted on the platform could be a solution to overcome lengthy court processes. The decision shall be standardised for all proceedings according to a model incorporated into the platform. Thus, the enforceability will be facilitated, and the process will be more accessible to the parties, ensuring the right of access to justice in this context.
About Authors
Lurdes Varregoso Mesquita
Assistant professor on UPT Portucalense, Assistant professor on ESTG-IPPorto and Researcher on IJP – Instituto Jurídico Portucalense, Oporto, Portugal;
lvm@upt.pt; mlcm@estg.ipp.pt
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3491-1921
Corresponding author, responsible for investigation and formal analysis. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the descriptions and the manuscript are accurate and agreed by all authors. Competing interests: The author declares there is no conflict of interest. Disclaimer: The author declare that her opinion and views expressed in this manuscript are free of any impact of any organizations.
Catia Marques Cebola
Assistant professor on ESTG of Polytechnic of Leiria, Invited Professor on ISCAC of Polytechnic Institute of Coimbraand Researcher on IJP – Instituto Jurídico Portucalense, Portugal
catia.cebola@ipleiria.pt
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3584-0718
Co-author, responsible for conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology. Competing interests: The author declares there is no conflict of interest. Disclaimer: The author declare that her opinion and views expressed in this manuscript are free of any impact of any organizations.
Contributorship: This article was written with the financial support of the Portuguese national funding agency for science, research and technology – FCT (Ref. UIDB/04112/2020) and integrates the research project ‘The Future of European and Transnational Civil Procedure - TRANS&EUCP_CIVPROC’ of the IJP – Instituto Jurídico Portucalense. The content of this article was translated with the participation of third parties under the authors’ responsibility.
Copyright: LV Mesquita, CM Cebola. The Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
References
-
Marques Cebola C, ‘Mediação e Arbitragem de Conflitos de Consumo: panorama português’ (2012) 6 Revista Luso-Brasileira de Direito do Consumo 11-46.
-
Marques Cebola C, Mediación (Marcial Pons 2013).
-
Hodges C, Delivering Dispute Resolution. A Holistic Review of Models in England and Wales (Beck/Hart Publishing 2019).
-
Esteban de La Rosa F, Marques Cebola C, ‘The Spanish and Portuguese Systems: two examples calling for a further reform. Uncovering the architecture underlying the new consumer ADR/ODR European framework’ (2019) 27(6) European Review of Private Law 1251-1278.
-
Ontanu EA, ‘Incorporating European Uniform Procedures into National Procedural Systems and Practice: Best Practices a Solution for Harmonious Application’ in Burkhard Hess, Xandra E. Kramer (eds), From common rules to best practices in European Civil Procedure (Auflage 2017) 459-480.
-
Ontanu EA, Pannebakker E, ‘Tackling Language Obstacles in Cross-Border Litigation: The European Order for Payment and the European Small Claims Procedure Approach’ (2012) 5(3) Erasmus Law Review 169-186.
-
Katsh E, Rifkin J, Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace(Jossey-Bass 2011).
-
European Commission, ‘An evaluation study of national procedural laws and practices in terms of their impact on the free circulation of judgments and on the equivalence and effectiveness of the procedural protection of consumers under EU consumer law’ (2017) <https://op.europa.eu/pt/publication-detail/-/publication/531ef49a-9768-11e7-b92d-01aa75ed71a1/language-en> accessed 7 January 2022.
-
Inchausti G, ‘Have the EU Regulations on Judicial Cooperation Fostered Harmonisation of National Procedures?’ in Fernando Gascón Inchausti (ed), The Future of the European Law of Civil Procedure (Burkhard Hess Intersentia 2020) 91-110.
-
Matteucci G, ‘Mandatory Mediation, The Italian Experience’ (2015) 16 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Processual – REDP 189-210.
-
Winestone J, Mandatory Mediation: A Comparative Review of How Legislatures in California and Ontario are Mandating the Peacemaking Process in Their Adversarial Systems (2015) <https://www.mediate.com/articles/WinestoneJ4.cfm> accessed 7 January 2022.
-
Varregoso Mesquita L, ‘Mediação Civil e Comercial - As modalidades pré-judicial e intra-processual como elemento motivador’ (2017) 1 Maia Jurídica – Revista de Direito 13-38.
-
Alexander N, Global Trends in Mediation (Kluwer Law International 2006).
-
Alexander N, Chong S, The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Commentary(Wolters Kluwer 2019).
-
Rabinovich-Einy O, Katsh E, ‘Technology and the Future of Dispute Systems Design’ (2012) 17 Harvard Negotiation Law Review 151-199.
-
Kramer X, ‘Small claim, simple recovery? The European Small Claims Procedure and Its Implementation in the Member States’ (2011) 12 ERA Forum – Journal of European Law 119-133.
-
Kramer X, Ontanu EA, ‘The functioning of the European Small Claims Procedure in the Netherlands: normative and empirical reflections’ (2013)3 Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht 319-328.
Reviews for article
Add a Review
How to cite it?
-
-
LV Mesquita, CM Cebola, ‘European Small Claims Procedure: An Effective Process? A Proposal for an Online Platform’ 2022 No2(No14) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 7-21. 10.33327/ AJEE-18-5.2-a000206
-
