Skip to main content

The Dawn of Collective Redress 3.0 in France?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Class Actions in Europe

Part of the book series: Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice ((IUSGENT,volume 89))

  • 612 Accesses

Abstract

France is a country with a long tradition of collective proceedings in general but has only a limited experience when it comes to group actions in particular (which are called in French ‘actions de groupe’). This procedural instrument was formally adopted in 2014 after decades of tense debates and controversies. Its subsequent developments have been patchy and the problems plaguing its functioning and its added value for harmed individuals remain multiple in practice. Unexpectedly, the development of group actions in France has triggered several interesting evolutions. They have first revitalised old and pre-existing procedural mechanisms, which were until now rarely used. Second, they have indirectly contributed to the emergence of a myriad of new Legaltech actors attracted by an emerging mass litigation market in France. These actors use online tools and platforms for mobilising individual claimants, hence structuring mass claims. In parallel, the recent EU initiatives, and in particular the adoption in November 2020 of Directive 2020/1828 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interest of consumers, are likely to have an important impact on the French collective redress landscape. In other words, France may be at the dawn of a new era, the one of ‘collective redress 3.0’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hensler et al. (2016).

  2. 2.

    Yeazell (1977, 1987).

  3. 3.

    Hensler (2017).

  4. 4.

    Ibid.

  5. 5.

    Biard and Pato (2019).

  6. 6.

    Biard and Amaro (2016).

  7. 7.

    Crim., 20 May 2015, n° 14-81.147, JurisData n° 2015-011901.

  8. 8.

    Patetta (2010).

  9. 9.

    Hyest (2006). The report highlighted (in French): ‘ce système très peu utilisé est tombé en désuétude … Les associations ont signalé l’extrême lourdeur de la gestion des mandats individuels reçus conduisant à une paralysie de l’action’.

  10. 10.

    Dupont (2011).

  11. 11.

    Bacache (2013).

  12. 12.

    Moracchini-Zeidenberg (2013).

  13. 13.

    See, e.g., http://www.victimes-isomeride.asso.fr/.

  14. 14.

    Bechu and Kaltenbach (2019).

  15. 15.

    Ascenci and Bernheim-Desvaux (2012).

  16. 16.

    See ‘Médiation du Crédit Foncier: un « accord exemplaire » selon l’AFUB’, nov. 2009, www.cbanque.com/actu/13284/mediation-du-credit-foncier-un-accord-exemplaire-selon-afub.

  17. 17.

    Calais Auloy (1985).

  18. 18.

    Veillard and Volders (2008), Azar-Baud (2013), Biard (2014).

  19. 19.

    See, e.g., Discours aux forces vives de la Nation, January 2005. Available at www.actiondegroupe.com/chirac-classaction/. Accessed November 2019.

  20. 20.

    Du Chastel (2008), Martinet and Du Chastel (2009), Amrani-Mekki (2012).

  21. 21.

    Azar-Baud and Carval (2015).

  22. 22.

    See www.quechoisir.org/action-ufc-que-choisir-l-ufc-que-choisir-lance-la-premiere-action-de-groupe-contre-foncia-groupe-44-millions-d-euros-doivent-etre-reverses-aux-locataires-n12371/. Accessed November 2019.

  23. 23.

    Namely, UFC Que Choisir v. Foncia (1 October 2014), Confédération Syndicale des Familles (CSF) v Paris Habitat- OPH (13 October 2014), Consommation, Logement et Cadre de Vie (CLCV) v. Axa and AGIPI (28 October 2014).

  24. 24.

    Molfessis (2014), Claudel (2014), Haeri and Javaux (2014).

  25. 25.

    Bretzner (2013) and Portmann (2019).

  26. 26.

    Beteille and Yung (2019).

  27. 27.

    Brochier (2014).

  28. 28.

    Bacache (2016).

  29. 29.

    Bugada (2017).

  30. 30.

    Azar-Baud (2017a).

  31. 31.

    Azar-Baud (2017b), Mainguy (2016), Amrani-Mekki (2015).

  32. 32.

    Azar-Baud (2017a).

  33. 33.

    In September 2020, the French consumer organisation CLCV finally started a group actions against Volkswagen seeking compensation on behalf of French consumers (see: Biard 2021).

  34. 34.

    Ibid.

  35. 35.

    Azar-Baud (2018).

  36. 36.

    See www.observatoireactionsdegroupe.fr. Accessed November 2019.

  37. 37.

    CSF v. Paris Habitat OPH was settled for €2 million distributed to 100,000 individuals. UFC v. Free Mobile was settled for an amount of €1.7 million (group members individually received between €1 and €12. Familles Rurales v. SAS Manoir de Ker an Poul was also settled.

  38. 38.

    Azar-Baud (2019).

  39. 39.

    Abad and Kemel (2016), Cour des Comptes (2017), Biard (2018a), Javaux and Haeri (2019).

  40. 40.

    Biard (2018b).

  41. 41.

    Abad and Kemel (2016).

  42. 42.

    Javaux (2017).

  43. 43.

    Abad and Kemel (2016).

  44. 44.

    Proposition de loi n°1327 pour ouvrir les actions de groupe aux citoyens, 17 octobre 2018 (in French: ‘cette proposition de loi s’inscrit dans le mouvement d’une plus grande inclusion de la société civile dans l’accès au droit’).

  45. 45.

    See Rapp. AN n°1574, p. 40.

  46. 46.

    CA Paris, Pole 4, Chamber 3, Nov. 9, 2017, No. 16/05321: D. 2017. 2368; JA 2018, n°571, p. 11, obs. X. Delpech; RTD civ. 2018. 149, obs. P.-Y. Gautier.

  47. 47.

    Danon (2019).

  48. 48.

    Coignac (2015).

  49. 49.

    Biard and Pato (2019).

  50. 50.

    See https://www.isoc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2018-11-MED-Facebook.pdf. Accessed November 2019.

  51. 51.

    Ibid.

  52. 52.

    See www.quechoisir.org/decryptage-action-de-groupe-contre-google-vos-questions-nos-reponses-n68427/. Accessed November 2019.

  53. 53.

    Biard (2019a).

  54. 54.

    Biard and Kramer (2019), Biard and Javaux (2019).

  55. 55.

    See also Rott (2016).

  56. 56.

    Biard and Javaux (2019).

  57. 57.

    Dufour (2015), Barreau de Paris (2017).

  58. 58.

    Barreau de Paris (2015).

  59. 59.

    van Elten and Rehder (2018). For example, in 2018 four NGOs launched a campaign called the ‘Century’s Affair’ (‘L’Affaire du siècle’) to obtain signatures for a petition forcing the government to act against climate change.

  60. 60.

    Some of these platforms have been depicted as (in French): ‘un véritable supermarché d’actions, dans lequel le client-justiciable n’a plus qu’à se servir. La justice à portée de clic’ (Médiacités, ‘Plateformes d’actions collectives: la Justice à portée de clic?’,13 novembre 2019. www.mediacites.fr/enquete/national/2019/11/13/plateformes-dactions-collectives-la-justice-a-portee-de-clic/. Accessed November 2019.

  61. 61.

    The platform mysmartcab states (in French): ‘à l’inverse dans le cadre d’une action collective le justiciable garde sa liberté d'action. Par ce biais, vous êtes à l'origine de l'action et vous devenez coproducteur de la décision judiciaire. Au final, la décision vous appartient et elle ne dépend pas d'une décision prise par une association de consommateurs ou une majorité dans laquelle votre voix se trouve perdue’.

  62. 62.

    See, e.g., www.justice.cool/la-mediation-avec-justice-cool/. Accessed November 2019.

  63. 63.

    See https://actions.vpourverdict.com/. Accessed November 2019.

  64. 64.

    See https://cessezlefeu.com/. Accessed November 2019.

  65. 65.

    See https://cessezlefeu.com/foire-aux-questions/. Accessed November 2019.

  66. 66.

    Biard and Javaux (2019).

  67. 67.

    See mysmartcab (in French: pour autant, la plateforme n’entend pas opposer actions de groupe et actions collectives conjointes. Nous souhaitons mettre au point un outil commun de l’action collective et la plateforme a vocation à s’ouvrir à tous ceux (avocats, associations, ONG, syndicats, etc.) soucieux de défendre, via la justice, l’intérêt général’)(emphasis in original).

  68. 68.

    See http://www.clcv.org/communiques-de-presse/litige-de-consommation-demander-justice-avec-la-clcv.html. Accessed November 2019.

  69. 69.

    Biard and Javaux (2019).

  70. 70.

    EU Commission (2018a); Biard (2018a); Azard-Baud (2020), pp. 233–268; Azar-Baud (2021).

  71. 71.

    EU Commission (2018b).

  72. 72.

    EU Commission (2017a, b).

  73. 73.

    EU Commission (2018a).

  74. 74.

    EU Commission (2013).

  75. 75.

    Stadler (2013), Hodges (2014), Sorabji (2014), Nagy (2015), Voet (2014a, b).

  76. 76.

    Trans Europe Experts (2018).

  77. 77.

    EU Commission (2018b), Biard (2018b), Trans Europe Experts (2018).

  78. 78.

    Citizens’ Dialogue in Vienna, 25 September 2018. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/events/citizens-dialogues/citizens-dialogue-vienna-commissioner-vera-jourova-new-deal-consumers-2018-sep-25_en. Accessed November 2019.

  79. 79.

    EU Parliament (2017), BEUC (2017).

  80. 80.

    Biard (2018b), Biard and Kramer (2019).

  81. 81.

    Several Member States have indeed sent reasoned opinions (e.g. Czech Republic) or expressed concerns (e.g. Germany).

  82. 82.

    Hodges (2008), Tzankova (2017).

  83. 83.

    EU Commission (2013).

  84. 84.

    EU Commission (2018a).

  85. 85.

    Les Échos, ‘Le financement de contentieux aiguise l’appétit des fonds, 27 August 2019. Available at www.lesechos.fr/finance-marches/marches-financiers/le-financement-de-contentieux-aiguise-lappetit-des-fonds-1126728. Accessed November 2019.

  86. 86.

    Babonneau (2013).

  87. 87.

    Barreau de Paris (2016).

  88. 88.

    ICC (2014), Barreau de Paris (2017).

  89. 89.

    See www.wejustice.com/comment-ca-marche. Accessed November 2019.

  90. 90.

    Regulation n°1512/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.

  91. 91.

    Regulation n°593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations.

  92. 92.

    Regulation n°864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II).

  93. 93.

    Stadler (2013), Kramer (2014).

  94. 94.

    Trans Europe Experts (2018).

  95. 95.

    Azar-Baud (2013), Biard and Kramer (2019).

  96. 96.

    Trans Europe Experts (2018).

  97. 97.

    Trans Europe Experts (2018).

  98. 98.

    Euractiv, ‘EU clear path for collective law suits’, 11 April 2018. Available at www.euractiv.com/section/eu-priorities-2020/news/eu-clears-path-for-collective-law-suits. Accessed November 2019.

  99. 99.

    Biard (2019b).

References

  • Abad D, Kemel P (2016) Rapport d’information sur la mise en application de la loi 2014-344, n°4139, 19 octobre 2016. Available at www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/rap-info/i4139.asp. Accessed Nov 2019

  • Amrani-Mekki S (2012) La rengaine de l’action de groupe. Gazette du Palais 252

    Google Scholar 

  • Amrani-Mekki S (2015) L’action groupe du 21e siècle - un modèle réduit et réducteur. La semaine juridique, november 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascenci & Bernheim-Desvaux (2012) La médiation collective, solution amiable pour résoudre les litiges de masse. Contrats, concurrences, consommation, n°8-9, étude 9

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2013) Les actions collectives en droit de la consommation, Etude de droit français et argentin à la lumière du droit comparé. Nouvelle Bibliothèque de thèses, Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2017a) De l’inaction aux actions de groupe: nouveaux enjeux. Entretien Dalloz 19 janvier 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2017b) 3 questions: Actions de groupe: nouveaux enjeux, JCP E 26 janvier 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2018) En attendant un registre d’actions de groupe et autres actions collectives - Une revue de presse 1637

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2019) Actions de groupe: Perspectives et pistes d'amélioration, Dalloz, Juris associations 591

    Google Scholar 

  • Azard-Baud MJ (2020) French Group Action Lawsuits – between tradition and modernity. REDC, Revue européenne de droit de la consommation/Eur J Consumer Law 2:233–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ (2021) The effects of the directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interest of consumers on the French group action regime. Rev. Italo-española de Derecho procesal, 2021/1, Marcial Pons, 2/2021

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar-Baud MJ, Carval S (2015) L’action de groupe et la réparation des dommages de consommation: bilan d’étape et préconisations, Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Babonneau M (2013) Alter Litigation ou le financement de contentieux par des tiers. Dalloz Actualité 4 avril 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacache M (2013) L'indemnisation des victimes de contaminations sanguines: le casse-tête. Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Civil

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacache M (2016) Les spécificités de l’action de groupe en droit de la santé. Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreau de Paris (2015) Actions conjointes des justiciables: les avocats mises sur le numérique. Available at www.avocats.paris/actualites-evenements/actions-conjointes-des-justiciables-les-avocats-misent-sur-le-numerique. Accessed November 2019

  • Barreau de Paris (2016) Le financement de l’arbitrage par les tiers (‘Third-Party Funding’). Available at www.avocatparis.org/system/files/publications/rapport_et_projet_resolution_tpf_0.pdf. Accessed November 2019.

  • Barreau de Paris (2017) Résolution sur le financement de l’arbitrage par les tiers, 21 February 2017. Available at http://www.avocatparis.org/system/files/publications/resolution_financement_de_larbitrage_par_les_tiers.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • Bechu C, Kaltenbach P (2019) Rapport d’information fait au nom de la Commission des lois du Sénat sur l’indemnisation des victimes, No 107, 2013. Available at https://www.senat.fr/rap/r13-107/r13-1071.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • Beteille L, Yung R (2019) Rapport d’information fait au nom de la Commission des lois du Sénat sur l’action de groupe, n°499, 26 Mai 2010. Available at: www.senat.fr/rap/r09-499/r09-4991.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • Beuc (2017) Letter sent to President Juncker and Commissioner Jourova ‘Time for the European Commission to legislate on Collective Redress’, 10 October 2017. Available at www.beuc.eu/publications/beuc-x-2017-107_time_for_the_european_commission_to_legislate_on_collective_redress.pdf. Accessed November 2019.

  • Biard A (2014) Judges & Mass Litigation from a (Behavioural) Law & Economics Perspective (PhD thesis, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Hamburg Universität, Università di Bologna. Available at http://ediss.sub.uni-hamburg.de/volltexte/2016/8204/pdf/BIARD_Manuscript_2014.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • Biard A (2018a) Sale temps pour l’action de groupe… la nécessaire recherche d’outils alternatifs pour résoudre les litiges de masse. 157 Revue Lamy Droit Civil

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A (2018b) Collective redress in the EU: a rainbow behind the clouds? ERA Forum 19

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A (2019a) Justice en ligne ou nouveau Far Www.est? La difficile régulation des plateformes en ligne de règlement extrajudiciaire des litiges, Revue internationale de droit économique 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A (2019b) Ensuring the quality of ODR platforms: a new (voluntary) certification scheme in France’, Conflict of Laws Blog, 13 November 2019. Available at: http://conflictoflaws.net/2019/ensuring-quality-of-odr-platforms-a-new-voluntary-certification-scheme-in-france/. Accessed November 2019

  • Biard A (2021) Retour sur 6 ans de Dieselgate en Europe du point de vue des consommateurs. D.C.C.R. (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A, Amaro R (2016) Resolving Mass Claims in France: Toolbox & Experience. BACT-RILE Working Paper Series

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A, Javaux B (2019) Recours collectifs à l’heure de la Legaltech: l’initiative européenne serait-elle déjà obsolète? Revue Lamy Droit Civil, Septembre 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A, Kramer X. (2019) The EU directive on representative actions for consumers: a milestone or another missed opportunity, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZEuP)

    Google Scholar 

  • Biard A, Pato A (2019) Dancing Cheek-to-Cheek: Collective Redress & Data Protection, Leuven Blog for Public Law, 16 August 2019. Available at: www.leuvenpubliclaw.com/dancing-cheek-to-cheek-collective-redress-data-protection/. Accessed November 2019

  • Bretzner JD (2013) Ombres et Lumières autour de la Qualité pour Agir dans l’Action de Groupe. Gazette du Palais 16 May 2013, n°136

    Google Scholar 

  • Brochier M (2014) La “transaction de groupe”, Les particularités de la transaction dans l’action de groupe. Semaine Juridique Entreprise

    Google Scholar 

  • Bugada A (2017) L’action de groupe en matière de discrimination dans les relations de travail’, JCP S 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Calais Auloy J (1985) Rapport de la Commission pour la codification du droit de la consommation - Proposition pour un code de la consommation

    Google Scholar 

  • Claudel E (2014) Action de groupe et autres dispositions concurrence de la loi consommation: un dispositif singulier. Revue trimestrielle de droit commercial

    Google Scholar 

  • Coignac A (2015) Action de groupe: quelle stratégie pour les entreprises? Dalloz Actualité 16 février 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Cour des comptes (2017) Référé S2017-3839, 18 Decembre 2017. Available at www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2018-02/20180305-refere-S2017-3908-DGCCRF-protection-eco-consommateur.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • Danon A (2019) Logement: avant ELAN, l’action de groupe était impossible. Dalloz juillet 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Du Chastel A (2008) L’action de groupe ou le mythe de Sisyphe. Petites Affiches 23 juin 2008, n°125

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufour O (2015) Actions de groupe: la riposte du Barreau de Paris. Gazette du Palais 28 novembre 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupont N (2011) L’Action en Représentation Conjointe des Associations de Consommateurs ou l’Action Mal-Aimée des Juges. Recueil Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Elten K, Rehder B (2018) Demand justice and Dieselgate: how a transnational civil society coalition rocks the legal systems in Europe’. Paper prepared for the ECPR Standing Group, Sciences Po, Paris SGEU conference, 13–15 June 2018. Available at https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/c803b862-4eab-4620-aea8-07c6a8293f5b.pdf. Accessed November 2019

  • EU Commission (2013) Recommendation of 11 June 2013 on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning violations of rights granted under Union Law, OJ L 201

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission (2017a) Report on the fitness check on EU consumer and marketing Law, SWD (2017)209 final, 23 May 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission (2017b) Report on the implementation of the Commission Recommendation of 11 June 2013 on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning violations of rights granted under Union Law, COM(2018)40 final, 25 January 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission (2018a) Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC, COM (2018)184 final, 11 April 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission (2018b) A New Deal for Consumers, COM (2018)183 final, 11 April 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Parliament (2017) Recommendation following the inquiry into emission measurements in the automotive sector, P8-TA (2017)0100, 4 April 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeri K, Javaux B (2014) L’action de groupe à la française, une curiosité. La Semaine Juridique edition générale 31 mars 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensler D (2017) From sea to shining sea: how an why class actions are spreading globally. Univ Kansas Law Rev 65:965

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensler D, Hodges C, Tzankova I (eds) (2016) Class actions in context: how culture, economics and politics shape collective litigation. Edward Elgar Publisher

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C (2008) The Reforms of class and representative actions in European legal systems. A new framework for collective redress in Europe. Hart, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C (2014) Collective redress: a breakthrough or a damp sqibb? J Consum Policy 37:67–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyest JJ (2006) Rapport d’information fait au nom de la Commission des lois du Sénat sur les Class Actions, n°249, 14 mars 2006. Available at www.senat.fr/rap/r05-249/r05-2490.html. Accessed November 2019

  • ICC (International Chamber of Commerce), Guide pratique sur le financement de l’arbitrage par les tiers, 2014. Available at www.icc-france.fr/chambre-de-commerce-internationale-page-6-64-506-Arbitrage.html. Accessed November 2019

  • Javaux B (2017) De la difficulté d’obtenir la nullité de l’assignation en action de groupe. Revue Lamy Droit Civil 154:6388

    Google Scholar 

  • Javaux B, Haeri K (2019) Action de groupe: quatre ans après, un bilan en demi-teinte, Dalloz avocats 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer X (2014) Securities collective action and private international law issues in Dutch WCAM settlements: global aspirations and regional boundaries. Pac McGeorge Glob Dev Law J 27:235

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainguy D (2016) L’élargissement des actions de groupe. Revue Lamy Droit Civil 136

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinet L, Du Chastel A (2009) Du retour de l’action de groupe et du mythe de Sisyphe. Petites Affiches 49

    Google Scholar 

  • Molfessis N (2014) L’exorbitance de l’action de groupe à la française. Recueil Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Moracchini-Zeidenberg M (2013) Mediator: la bataille du lien de causalité continue. Responsabilité civile et assurances 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagy C (2015) The European collective redress debate after the European Commission’s Recommendation—one step forward, two steps back? Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 22:530–552

    Google Scholar 

  • Patetta G (2010) Une illustration flagrante des limites du système français. Revue Lamy Droit civil 70

    Google Scholar 

  • Portmann O (2019) Il est inacceptable de réserver l’action de groupe à 17 personnes morales. Dalloz actualité

    Google Scholar 

  • Rott P (2016) Claims management services: an alternative to ADR? Eur Rev Priv Law 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorabji J (2014) Reflections on the commission communication on collective redress. IJEL 17:58

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler A (2013) The Commission’s Recommendation on common principles of collective redress and private international law issues. Ned Int Privaatr 4:483–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Trans Europe Experts (2018) Collective Redress in the Member States of the European Union

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzankova I (2017) Wetsvoorstel collectieve schadevergoedingsactie: een oplossing voor welk probleem ook alweer? TVP

    Google Scholar 

  • Veillard I, Volders B (2008) La consécration des actions de groupe en Europe – La traversée de l’Atlantique aurait-elle adouci le Monstre à la Frankenstein? Revue de jurisprudence commerciale 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2014a) European collective redress: a status quaestionis. Int J Proc Law 4:97

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2014b) Where the wild things are. Reflections on the state and future of European collective redress. In: Keirse A, Loos M (eds) Waves in contract and liability law in three decades of Ius Commune. Intersentia

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeazell S (1977) Group litigation and social context: toward a history of the class action. Columbia Law Rev 77:866

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeazell S (1987) From medieval group litigation to the modern class action. Yale University Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandre Biard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Azar-Baud, M.J., Biard, A. (2021). The Dawn of Collective Redress 3.0 in France?. In: Uzelac, A., Voet, S. (eds) Class Actions in Europe. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 89. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73036-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73036-9_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-73035-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-73036-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics