PROCEEDINGS REFERRING TO THE PROTECTION OF COLLECTIVE RIGHTS AND INTERESTS WITH A REVIEW OF THE SITUATION IN REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA
Abstract
The protection granted in the litigation procedure traditionally bears individual characteristics. It is primarily aimed at achieving individual justice in every particular case, providing the individuals the possibility to exercise their injured or disputed rights. In contemporary conditions, the question which is more and more getting imposed refers to the fact whether such a structure of the civil procedure can meet the needs to provide an adequate and efficient legal protection in disputes where there is a need to protect the rights of tens, hundreds, and even thousands of people in the cases of the so-called “mass harm situations“. These procedures can achieve not only an adequate compensation to the holder of the right for the resulting violations of that right (even in situations where the interests of the individual are so small, that it does not represent a sufficient incentive for that person to initiate proceedings for the protection of that right), but they also serve for a realization of a more general goal - to achieve the effect of „deterrence” against future violations of the collective rights and interests. In Republic of Macedonia a general legal framework for protecting collective rights and interests has not been established yet, but this issue is only regulated fragmentary, so there is a question arisen whether the time has come to develop a general legal framework for collective redress procedures.
References
Anderson, B., Trask, A. (2010). The Class Action Playbook, New York, Oxford University Press
Baretić, M. (2009). Individualna i kolektivna zaštita potrošača u hrvatskom pravu u: Republika Hrvatska na putu prema europskom pravosudnom području, Rijeka, Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci
Cappelletti, M., Garth, B. (1978). Access to Justice: The Worldwide Movement to Make Rights More Effective - A General Report u: Cappelletti, M., Garth, B (ed.) Access to Justice – A World Survey, Sijthoff and Noordhoff
Coffee, J. C. (2006). Reforming the Securities Class Actions: An Essay of Deterrence and Its Implementation. Columbia Law Review 106 (7), str. 1534-1586
Consultation paper on collective redress, Brussels, 4 February 2011 SEC(2011)173.
Dika, M. (2011). Postupak u sporovima za zaštitu kolektivnih interesa i prava u: Novela Zakona o parničnom postupku iz 2011, Zagreb, Novi informator
Fairgrieve, D., Howells, G. (2009). Collective Redress Procedures - European Debates. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58 (2), str. 379-409
Favela, J. O. (2003). Acciones Populares y Acciones Para La Tutela de Los Intereses Colectivos. Boletin Mexicano de Derecho Comparado 107, str. 587-615
Hodges, C. (2001). Multi-Party Actions: A European Approach. Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 11, str. 321-354
Hodges, C. (2008). The Reform of Class and Representative Actions in European Legal Systems – A New Framework for Collective Redress in Europe, Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland – Oregon
Janevski, A., Zoroska Kamilovska, T. (2012). Građansko procesno pravo, Kniga prva, Parnično pravo, drugo izmenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje, Skoplje, Praven Fakultet „Justinijan Prvi“ – Skopje
Moller, M. (2005). The Rule of Law Problem: Unconstitutional Class Actions and Options for Reform. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 28 (3), str. 855-908
Mulheron, R. (2009). The Case for an Opt-Out Class Action for European Member States: A Legal and Empirical Analysis. The Columbia Journal of European Law 15, str. 409-453
Pellegrini Grinover, A. (1984). A problematicа dos interesses difusos u: A tutela dos intereses difusos, Sao Paolo
Recommendation on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning violations of rights granted under Union Law, 11 June 2013, OJ L 201, 26.7.2013
Rosenberg, D. (1984). The Causal Connection in Mass Exposure Cases: A “Public Law” Vision of the Tort System. Harvard Law Review 97 (4), str. 849-929
Triva S., Dika, M. (2004). Građansko parnično procesno pravo, Zagreb, Narodne novine
Uzelac, A. (2012). Goals of Civil Procedure (General Report) u: Maleshin, D., (urednik), Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context (Conference Book), IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, 18-21 September 2012, Moscow, Russia, Statut
Van Rhee, C. H. (2012). Dutch National Report with Some Additional Information on Belgium and France u: Maleshin, D., (urednik), Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context (Conference Book), IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, 18-21 September 2012, Moscow, Russia, Statut
Wrbka, S., Van Uytsel, S., Siems, M. (2012). Collective Actions – Enhancing Access to Justice and Reconciling Multilayer Interests?, New York, Cambridge University Press
Zakon o parničnom postupku, Služben vesnik na RM, br. 79/205, 110/08, 83/09, 116/10, prečišćen tekst br. 7/11
Zakon o sprečavanju i zaštita od diskriminacije, Služben vesnik na RM, br. 50/10, 44/13.
Zakon o zaštitu potrošača, Služben vesnik na RM, br. 38/04, 77/07, 103/08, 24/11, 164/13
Zakon o životne sredine, Služben vesnik na RM, br. 53/05, 81/05, 24/07, 159/08, 83/09, 48/10, 124/10, 51/11, 123/12, 93/13, 187/13, 42/14
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 University Business Academy in Novi Sad Faculty of Law for Commerce and Judiciary
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
