Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Class Actions in Belgium: Evaluation and the Way Forward

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Class Actions in Europe

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

  • 621 Accesses

Abstract

In 2014, Belgium introduced a consumer class action. In 2018, the procedure was expanded to disputes between SMEs and businesses. This chapter opens with a description of Belgium’s class action procedure (class action prerequisites, jurisdiction, opt-in or opt-out, procedure, redress and enforcement phase). It follows with an overview of the cases brought between September 2014 and April 2020 (nine in total). This (limited) case law allows us to draw a number of conclusions about the pros and cons of the procedure. The chapter then draws attention to new and alternative ways to achieve collective redress (consumer dispute resolution (CDR) and regulatory redress). The conclusion arrived at is that our focus should be on exploring and optimising all options for mass harm situations and to connect these options so they can form an integrated dispute resolution framework.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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.

    European Commission (2018) Press Release A New Deal for Consumers: Commission strengthens EU consumer rights and enforcement. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_18_3041. Accessed 15 Mar 2020.

  2. 2.

    Directive 2009/22 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests, 2009 O.J. (L 110) (EC).

  3. 3.

    Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC, COM/2018/0184 final – 2018/089 (COD).

  4. 4.

    Directive 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC, 2020 O.J. (L 409) (EU).

  5. 5.

    Council of the European Union (2019) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC—General Approach. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14600-2019-INIT/en/pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2020.

  6. 6.

    Loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 ‘De l’action en réparation collective’ au livre XVII ‘Procédures juridictionnelles particulières’ du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII dans le livre 1er du Code de droit économique [Act Introducing a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law] of 28 March 2014, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 29 April 2014, 35201.

  7. 7.

    Loi portant modification, en ce qui concerne l'extension de l'action en réparation collective aux P.M.E., du Code de droit économique [Act Expanding the Scope of Application of the Class Action in the Code of Economic Law] of 30 March 2018, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 22 May 2018, 41950.

  8. 8.

    This chapter is largely based on (and is an update of) Voet (2015).

  9. 9.

    This implies a difficult prima facie judgment on the merits of the case. ‘Possible’ does not mean certain. It means that, in all reasonableness, there has to be sufficient evidence showing a violation by the defendant.

  10. 10.

    Article XVII.36, 1° Code of Economic Law.

  11. 11.

    Article XVII.37 Code of Economic Law. In June 2017, Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union were added (Article XVII.37, 33°). In May 2018, Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (the General Data Protection Regulation) was added (in Article XVII.37, 10°/1).

  12. 12.

    The class representative cannot base his claim on general tort law (Article 1382 Belgian Civil Code: ‘any act whatever of man which causes damage to another obliges him by whose fault it occurred to make reparation’). He has to invoke the breach of one or more of the aforementioned regulations or acts.

  13. 13.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Rapport – Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Report of the Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/004, 17 February 2014, available at https://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/pdf/53/3300/53K3300004.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), pp. 41, 51, 63, 66, 68, 69, 71, 72 and 75.

  14. 14.

    Ibid., pp. 16–17, 22, 40 and 42–43.

  15. 15.

    Loi portant modification, en ce qui concerne l'extension de l'action en réparation collective aux P.M.E., du Code de droit économique [Act Expanding the Scope of Application of the Class Action in the Code of Economic Law] of 30 March 2018, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 22 May 2018, 41950.

  16. 16.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Fipronil_eggs_contamination. Accessed 25 Apr 2020.

  17. 17.

    2003 O.J. (L 124).

  18. 18.

    Article XVII.38, §1/1 Code of Economic Law.

  19. 19.

    Article 2.1 of the Annex of the Recommendation of 6 May 2003.

  20. 20.

    Lambrecht (2017).

  21. 21.

    Article XVII.36, 2° Code of Economic Law.

  22. 22.

    Article XVII.39, first two paragraphs Code of Economic Law.

  23. 23.

    On the day this association brings a class action it needs to have legal personality for at least 3 years.

  24. 24.

    Article XVII.40 Code of Economic Law.

  25. 25.

    Directive 2013/11 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC, 2013 O.J. (L 165) (EU).

  26. 26.

    Loi portant insertion du Livre XVI, “Règlement extrajudiciaire des litiges de consommation” dans le Code de droit économique [Act Introducing an Out-Of-Court Settlement Procedure for Consumers in the Code of Economic Law] of 4 April 2014, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 12 May 2014, 38262.

  27. 27.

    See Voet (2016a).

  28. 28.

    2013 O.J. (L 201).

  29. 29.

    Article XVII.39, last two paragraphs Code of Economic Law.

  30. 30.

    On the day this association brings a class action it needs to have legal personality for at least 3 years.

  31. 31.

    2013 O.J. (L 201).

  32. 32.

    Article XVII.36, 2° in fine Code of Economic Law.

  33. 33.

    See Gidi (2003), pp. 367–372 and Micklitz (2007), p. 21.

  34. 34.

    Article XVII.36, 3° Code of Economic Law.

  35. 35.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/001, 17 January 2014, available at www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/53/3300/53K3300001.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), pp. 8–9 and 21.

  36. 36.

    Article 633ter Belgian Judicial Code.

  37. 37.

    Article XVII.43, §2, 3° Code of Economic Law.

  38. 38.

    Articles XVII.38, §1, 2° (consumers) and XVII.38, §1/1, 2° (SMEs) Code of Economic Law.

  39. 39.

    Article XVII.43, §2, 3° Code of Economic Law.

  40. 40.

    Articles XVII.43, §3, XVII.50, XVII.55 and XVII. 62 Code of Economic Law. See https://economie.fgov.be/fr/themes/protection-des-consommateurs/action-en-reparation/decisions-rendues-dans-le. Accessed 10 Apr 2020.

  41. 41.

    Articles XVII.43, §2, 9° and XVII.54, §1, 6° Code of Economic Law.

  42. 42.

    Article XVII.42, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  43. 43.

    Article XVII.45-48 Code of Economic Law.

  44. 44.

    Article XVII.56 Code of Economic Law.

  45. 45.

    Article XVII.42, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  46. 46.

    Article XVII.45, §3, 2°-13° Code of Economic Law.

  47. 47.

    Article XVII.42, §3 Code of Economic Law.

  48. 48.

    See Sect. 2.1 above. The cause of action is a possible infraction by the defendant of his contractual obligations or of one of the (now) 33 European or Belgian consumer regulations or acts that are enumerated in the Act; the class action is brought by an adequate class representative and is more suitable than (or superior to) an individual civil action.

  49. 49.

    Article XVII.44, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  50. 50.

    Article XVII.49, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  51. 51.

    Ibid.

  52. 52.

    Ibid. There are no indications in the preparatory works of the Act of 28 March 2014 that the court could ask the parties to amend the agreement on grounds other than those mentioned in Article XVII.49, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  53. 53.

    Article XVII.49, §3 Code of Economic Law. See Sect. 2.6 below.

  54. 54.

    Articles XVII.46 and XVII.51 Code of Economic Law.

  55. 55.

    Article XVII.50 Code of Economic Law.

  56. 56.

    Article XVII.42, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  57. 57.

    Article XVII.42, §3 Code of Economic Law.

  58. 58.

    Article XVII.43, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  59. 59.

    Article XVII.43, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  60. 60.

    Article XVII.43, §3 Code of Economic Law. See https://economie.fgov.be/fr/themes/protection-des-consommateurs/action-en-reparation/decisions-rendues-dans-le. Accessed 10 Apr 2020.

  61. 61.

    Article XVII.45, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  62. 62.

    Article XVII.43, §2, 8° Code of Economic Law.

  63. 63.

    Article XVII.45, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  64. 64.

    Article XVII.45, §2 Code of Economic Law. On mediation in Belgium and the accreditation of mediators see Taelman and Voet (2015).

  65. 65.

    Article XVII.52 Code of Economic Law.

  66. 66.

    Article XVII.53 Code of Economic Law.

  67. 67.

    Article XVII.56 Code of Economic Law.

  68. 68.

    Article XVII.54, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  69. 69.

    Article XVII.54, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  70. 70.

    Article XVII.55 Code of Economic Law.

  71. 71.

    Articles XVII.45, §3, 6° and XVII.54, §1, 7° Code of Economic Law.

  72. 72.

    Article XVII.61, §2 Code of Economic Law and Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/001, 17 January 2014, available at www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/53/3300/53K3300001.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 42. On cy-près, see Mulheron (2006).

  73. 73.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/001, 17 January 2014, available at www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/53/3300/53K3300001.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 37.

  74. 74.

    Ibid.

  75. 75.

    Article XVII.57, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  76. 76.

    Article XVII.57, §1 Code of Economic Law. There are no detailed legal criteria to determine this competence.

  77. 77.

    Article XVII.58, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  78. 78.

    Article XVII.58, §3 Code of Economic Law.

  79. 79.

    Article XVII.58, §4 Code of Economic Law. The question arises whether an excluded class member can challenge the decision that excludes him. Because he is not a party to the proceedings, he cannot appeal the decision. The fact that the class member concerned is heard by the court does not make him a party.

  80. 80.

    Article XVII.60 Code of Economic Law.

  81. 81.

    Article XVII.61, §1 Code of Economic Law.

  82. 82.

    Article XVII.61, §1/1 Code of Economic Law.

  83. 83.

    Article XVII.61, §2 Code of Economic Law.

  84. 84.

    Article XVII.62 Code of Economic Law.

  85. 85.

    Arrêté royal relatif à l’indemnité du liquidateur dans le cadre de l’action en réparation collective [Royal Decree Regarding the Remuneration of the Claims Settler in the Context of a Class Action] of 6 December 2018, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 17 December 2018, 99084.

  86. 86.

    My thanks go to Laura Marcus of Test-Achats and Eric Houtman, Energy Ombudsman for providing me some additional information.

  87. 87.

    Recital (7) of Recommendation of the European Commission 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, 2013 O.J. (L 201).

  88. 88.

    Ibid., recitals (9) and (10).

  89. 89.

    Belgian Constitutional Court 17 March 2006, case 41-2016, available at http://www.const-court.be/en/common/home.html. Accessed 20 Apr 2020.

  90. 90.

    Section 4 below.

  91. 91.

    Section 2.1.1 above.

  92. 92.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Projet de loi portant modification, en ce qui concerne l’extension de l’action en réparation collective aux P.M.E., du Code de droit économique [Proposal to Expand the Scope of Application of the Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 2907/001, 22 January 2018, available at https://www.lachambre.be/FLWB/PDF/54/2907/54K2907001.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 4: ‘l’accord de gouvernement a prévu l’évaluation de la loi après deux ans, dans le but, en particulier, de déterminer s’il était opportun d’en étendre le bénéfice à d’autres catégories de justiciables. Cette évaluation a conduit à la conclusion que son extension aux PME est souhaitée par de nombreux acteurs’.

  93. 93.

    The legislative proposal was submitted to Parliament on 22 January 2018. Two months later, on 22 March 2018, the proposal was already accepted by Parliament. See https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/showpage.cfm?section=flwb&language=fr&cfm=/site/wwwcfm/flwb/flwbn.cfm?dossierID=2907&legislat=54&inst=K. Accessed 20 Mar 2020.

  94. 94.

    Mulheron (2004), p. 303 (referring to an ideological plaintiff).

  95. 95.

    Voet (2013a), pp. 457–464.

  96. 96.

    This refers to the class-entity or class-as-client theory (Shapiro (1998)).

  97. 97.

    This criticism was also raised in Parliament (Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Rapport – Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Report of the Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/004, 17 February 2014, available at https://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/pdf/53/3300/53K3300004.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 13).

  98. 98.

    Ibid., pp. 11 and 14.

  99. 99.

    Ibid., p. 18.

  100. 100.

    Section 2.1.2 above.

  101. 101.

    I focus only on associations that can bring consumer class actions and not on associations that can bring SME class actions, since no such actions were brought to date.

  102. 102.

    For example in 2018, Test-Achats made a profit of €3,328,960.73 (see https://cri.nbb.be/bc9/web/catalog;jsessionid=F7C4467C63DF113260524C64196CC7D2?execution=e1s2 (accessed 25 Apr 2020)).

  103. 103.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Rapport – Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Report of the Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/004, 17 February 2014, available at https://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/pdf/53/3300/53K3300004.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 57.

  104. 104.

    Section 2.1.2 above.

  105. 105.

    Ibid.

  106. 106.

    See Voet (2016b).

  107. 107.

    Tzankova (2012), p. 554.

  108. 108.

    Including Belgium, see Article 1017 Belgian Judicial Code.

  109. 109.

    Voet (2016b).

  110. 110.

    Section 2.2 above.

  111. 111.

    Choi (2004), p. 1517 (‘specialized judges may develop expertise in distinguishing between frivolous and meritorious claims and therefore become more willing to sanction frivolous suits’). This is also in the best interests of defendants.

  112. 112.

    Article 1068 Belgian Judicial Code.

  113. 113.

    Articles XVII.38, §1 (consumers) and XVII.38, §1/1 (SMEs) Code of Economic Law.

  114. 114.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/001, 17 January 2014, available at www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/53/3300/53K3300001.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), pp. 23 and 31.

  115. 115.

    Chambre des représentants de Belgique, Rapport – Projet de loi portant insertion d’un titre 2 “De l’action en réparation collective” au livre XVII “Procédures juridictionnelles particulières” du Code de droit économique et portant insertion des définitions propres au livre XVII [Report of the Proposal to Introduce a Consumer Class Action in the Code of Economic Law], Doc. 3300/004, 17 February 2014, available at https://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/pdf/53/3300/53K3300004.pdf (accessed 20 Mar 2020), p. 52.

  116. 116.

    In Belgium, Falla proposed a Quebecian-inspired toolbox to deal with the distribution of damages under the Belgian class action regime (Falla (2014)).

  117. 117.

    Hodges and Voet (2018), pp. 211–260 and Voet (2017), pp. 131–133.

  118. 118.

    This is also the preferred option of the European policymakers: ‘The Member States should ensure that the parties to a dispute in a mass harm situation are encouraged to settle the dispute about compensation consensually or out-of-court, both at the pre-trial stage and during civil trial …’; ‘The Member States should ensure that judicial collective redress mechanisms are accompanied by appropriate means of collective alternative dispute resolution available to the parties before and throughout the litigation …’ (Articles 25 and 26 of Recommendation of the European Commission 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, 2013 O.J. (L 201)).

  119. 119.

    Section 2.4 above.

  120. 120.

    Creutzfeldt (2013) and Hodges (2014).

  121. 121.

    Hörnle (2009).

  122. 122.

    Directive 2013/11 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR), 2013 O.J. (L 165) (EU) and Regulation 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR), 2013 O.J. (L 165) (EU).

  123. 123.

    https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/odr. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  124. 124.

    Weber and Hodges (2012), p. 148.

  125. 125.

    Hodges (2016), p. 353.

  126. 126.

    For an overview see Cortés (2016a).

  127. 127.

    Section 2.1.2 above.

  128. 128.

    https://consumerombudsman.be/en. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  129. 129.

    Two members of the Telecom Mediation Service, two members of the Ombudsman Service for the Postal Sector, two members of the Ombudsman Service for Energy, two members of the Mediator for Rail Passengers, the Ombudsman in Financial Matters and the Insurance Ombudsman.

  130. 130.

    The exchange of data is facilitated by Article 17 of the Consumer ADR Directive dealing with the ‘cooperation between ADR entities and national authorities enforcing Union legal acts on consumer protection’.

  131. 131.

    This was compiled on the basis of the 2016, 2017 and 2019 annual reports. https://mediationconsommateur.be/fr/publications/2. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  132. 132.

    See Micklitz and Wechsler (2016).

  133. 133.

    Hodges and Voet (2018), pp. 153–210 and Voet (2017), pp. 133–135. For a typology see Hodges (2015), pp. 841–845 (removing illicit profits, ordering redress to be paid, bringing a collective action, piggybacking civil claimants in public enforcement proceedings, referring assessment of loss to the court, ordering an infringer to create a restoration scheme, ordering an infringer to propose a compensation scheme, approving a compensation scheme proposed by one or more parties, referring a proposed compensation scheme to a court for approval, ordering an infringer to negotiate, etc).

  134. 134.

    Voet (2013b), p. 274.

  135. 135.

    http://www.fsma.be/. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  136. 136.

    https://www.creg.be/en. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  137. 137.

    For instance, require the publishing of a correction, inspections, publishing warnings, suspend trading, striking an intermediary from the register, revoking authorisation, imposing fines or penalties.

  138. 138.

    https://www.fsma.be/sites/default/files/public/sitecore/media%20library/Files/fsmafiles/news/2015-05_rentederivaten.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2020.

  139. 139.

    Loi relative à la surveillance du secteur financier et aux services financiers [Act Regarding the Surveillance of the Financial Sector and Financial Services] of 2 August 2002, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 4 September 2002, 39121.

  140. 140.

    Article 29 of the Loi relative à l'organisation du marché de l'électricité [Act Regadering the Organisation of the Electricity Market] of 29 April 1999, Moniteur belge [Official Gazette of Belgium] of 11 May 1999, 16264.

  141. 141.

    CREG (2015), p. 82 (‘d’autre part, la Chambre des litiges, qui constitue un organe de la CREG, n’a pas encore pu fonctionner en 2015, faute d’un arrêté de nomination de ses membres’).

  142. 142.

    Stuyck (2007), p. 5.

  143. 143.

    Cortés (2016b), p. 465.

  144. 144.

    Hodges (2016), p. 351.

References

  • Choi S (2004) The evidence on securities class actions. Vand Law Rev 57:1465–1526

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortés P (2016a) The new regulatory framework for consumer dispute resolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cortés P (2016b) Conclusion. Ensuring the provision of consumer dispute resolution. In: Cortés P (ed) The new regulatory framework for consumer dispute resolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 447–468

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • CREG (2015) Rapport Annuel 2015. https://www.creg.be/sites/default/files/assets/Publications/AnnualReports/2015-creg-ar-fr.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2020

  • Creutzfeldt N (2013) The origins and evolution of consumer dispute resolution systems in Europe. In: Hodges C, Stadler A (eds) Resolving mass disputes. ADR and settlement of mass claims. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 223–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Falla E (2014) Les dommages de masse. Propositions pour renforcer l’efficacité de l’action en réparation collective. Thèse visant à l’obtention du titre de docteur en sciences juridiques. Unpublished (on file with author). See http://difusion.ulb.ac.be/vufind/Record/ULB-DIPOT:oai:dipot.ulb.ac.be:2013/239308/Details. Accessed 27 Apr 2020

  • Gidi A (2003) Class actions in Brazil: a model for civil law countries. Am J Comp Law 51:311–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C (2014) Unlocking justice and markets: the promise of consumer ADR. In: Zekoll J, Bälz M, Amelung I (eds) Formalisation and flexibilisation in dispute resolution. Brill, Leiden, pp 336–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C (2015) Mass collective redress: ADR and regulatory techniques. ERPL 23:829–873

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C (2016) Consumer redress. Implementing the vision. In: Cortés P (ed) The new regulatory framework for consumer dispute resolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 351–370

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C, Voet S (2018) Delivering collective redress. New technologies. Hart, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörnle J (2009) Cross-border internet dispute resolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrecht P (2017) La “class action” pour les PME: un remède ultime. https://www.feb.be/domaines-daction/droit%2D%2Djustice/class-action/la%2D%2Dclass-action%2D%2Dpour-les-pme%2D%2Dun-remede-ultime_2017-09-06/. Accessed 10 Apr 2020

  • Micklitz H (2007) Collective private enforcement of consumer law: the key questions. In: van Boom WH, Loos M (eds) Collective enforcement of consumer law. Securing compliance in Europe through private group action and public authority intervention. Europe Law Publishing, Groningen, pp 13–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Micklitz H, Wechsler A (2016) The transformation of enforcement. European economic law in a global perspective. Hart, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulheron R (2004) The class action in common law legal systems: a comparative perspective. Hart Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulheron R (2006) The modern Cy-Près Doctrine. Applications & Implications. Routledge Cavendish, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro D (1998) Class actions: the class as party and client. Notre Dame Law Rev 73:913–962

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuyck J et al (2007) An Analysis and Evaluation of Alternative Means of Consumer Redress other than Redress through Ordinary Judicial Proceedings. Final Report. http://www.eurofinas.org/uploads/documents/policies/OTHER%20POLICY%20ISSUES/comparative_report_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020

  • Taelman P, Voet S (2015) Mediation in Belgium: a long and winding road. In: Esplugues C, Marquis L (eds) New developments in civil and commercial mediation. Springer, pp 89–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzankova I (2012) Funding of mass disputes: lessons from the Netherlands. J Law Econ Policy 8:549–591

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2013a) Cultural dimensions of group litigation: the Belgian case. Ga J Int Comp Law 41:433–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2013b) Public enforcement and A(O)DR as mechanisms for resolving mass problems: a Belgian perspective. In: Hodges C, Stadler A (eds) Resolving mass disputes. ADR and settlement of Mass Claims. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 270–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2015) Consumer collective redress in Belgium: class actions to the rescue. EBOR 16:121–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2016a) The implementation of the consumer ADR directive in Belgium. In: Cortés P (ed) The new regulatory framework for consumer dispute resolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 125–147

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2016b) The crux of the matter: funding and financing collective redress mechanisms. In: Hess B, Bergström M, Storskrubb E (eds) EU civil justice: current issues & future outlook. Hart, Oxford, pp 201–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Voet S (2017) 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, Cambridge, pp 105–140

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weber F, Hodges C (2012) The Netherlands. In: Hodges C, Benöhr I, Creutzfeldt-Banda N (eds) Consumer ADR in Europe. Hart, Oxford, pp 129–165

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Stefaan Voet

Authors
  1. Stefaan Voet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefaan Voet .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Alan Uzelac

  2. KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Stefaan Voet

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

Voet, S. (2021). Class Actions in Belgium: Evaluation and the Way Forward. 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_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73036-9_6

  • 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

Search

Navigation