CJEU Rules on Mandatory Mediation before Court Proceedings in Consumers Claims - international litigation blog
596
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-596,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,select-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,select-theme-ver-3.4,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.12.1,vc_responsive
 

CJEU Rules on Mandatory Mediation before Court Proceedings in Consumers Claims

CJEU Rules on Mandatory Mediation before Court Proceedings in Consumers Claims

DownloadPrint

On 14 June 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) handed down a judgment interpreting, in light of Directive 2013/11/EU of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes (Directive 2013/11/EU), the conditions under which mandatory out-of-court mediation should take place before a consumer can initiate court proceedings against a trader.

In the case at hand, Mr Livio Menini and Ms Maria Antonia Rampanelli, two Italian nationals, brought proceedings before the Verona District Court against a bank in order to have a loan repayment order set aside. However, under the relevant national Italian law, such an application brought before a court had to be preceded by a mediation procedure under which the parties had to be accompanied by a lawyer and were only allowed to withdraw from the process if they put forward a valid justification.

Uncertain as to whether those requirements complied with Directive 2013/11/EU – which aims at ensuring that consumers can, on a voluntary basis, submit complaints against traders to alternative dispute resolution procedures, providing that such procedures are independent, impartial, transparent, effective, fast and fair – the Verona District Court referred the matter to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling.

In reaching its judgment, the CJEU found that the requirement – under Italian law – that mandatory out-of-court mediation be initiated before bringing court proceedings may be compatible with the principle of effective judicial protection provided that such mediation (i) did not result in a binding decision on the parties; (ii) did not cause substantial delay; (iii) did not suspend the period for the time-barring of claims; and (iv) did not give rise to high costs. In addition, urgent interim measures should be possible.

The CJEU, however, noted that the contested Italian legislation could not require a consumer taking part in an alternative dispute resolution procedure to be assisted by a lawyer. In addition, the CJEU also found that the requirement, under the Italian legislation, that a consumer should demonstrate a valid reason before withdrawing from the mediation procedure violated Directive 2013/11/EU.

No Comments

Post a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.