美澳消费者个人代表型集团诉讼制度对我国的启示
发布时间：2019-07-06 09:32
【摘要】：2012年《民事诉讼法》修改后,正式规定了消费者公益诉讼的案件范围和原告资格,将"法律规定的机关和组织"作为诉讼主体,实际上肯定了我国消费者保护采用组织代表型集团诉讼的模式,排除了个人代表型集团诉讼的模式。这种单一的司法手段针对当前日益激增的消费者维权案件显然是不够的。文章拟分析对消费者权益进行集团诉讼保护的不同途径和利弊,同时选取集团诉讼最为发达的美国作为实证考察对象,针对美国和澳大利亚等国近年来通过个人代表型集团诉讼保护消费者权益的做法进行介绍并做以分析,以期为我国相关法律修订提供有益参考。
[Abstract]:After the revision of the Civil procedure Law in 2012, the scope of cases and the qualification of plaintiffs in consumer public interest litigation have been formally stipulated, and the "organs and organizations prescribed by law" have been taken as the subject of litigation. In fact, the consumer protection in our country has adopted the mode of organizational representative group litigation and excluded the mode of individual representative group litigation. This single judicial approach to the current growing number of consumer rights cases is clearly not enough. This paper intends to analyze the different ways, advantages and disadvantages of group action protection of consumers' rights and interests, and selects the United States, which is the most developed group litigation, as the object of empirical investigation, and introduces and analyzes the practices of protecting consumers' rights and interests through personal representative group litigation in the United States and Australia in recent years, in order to provide useful reference for the revision of relevant laws in China.
【作者单位】： 吉林大学法学院;
【分类号】：D971.2
[Abstract]:After the revision of the Civil procedure Law in 2012, the scope of cases and the qualification of plaintiffs in consumer public interest litigation have been formally stipulated, and the "organs and organizations prescribed by law" have been taken as the subject of litigation. In fact, the consumer protection in our country has adopted the mode of organizational representative group litigation and excluded the mode of individual representative group litigation. This single judicial approach to the current growing number of consumer rights cases is clearly not enough. This paper intends to analyze the different ways, advantages and disadvantages of group action protection of consumers' rights and interests, and selects the United States, which is the most developed group litigation, as the object of empirical investigation, and introduces and analyzes the practices of protecting consumers' rights and interests through personal representative group litigation in the United States and Australia in recent years, in order to provide useful reference for the revision of relevant laws in China.
【作者单位】： 吉林大学法学院;
【分类号】：D971.2
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 张磊;《消法》与《办法》的对垒[J];法律与生活;2001年02期
2 杜志华;欧盟消费者保护法的立法根据[J];武汉大学学报(社会科学版);2001年06期
3 余幸;消费者应获几倍赔偿?[J];质量指南;2002年08期
4 赵冬;徐瑜;;韩国消费者保护法律制度简介[J];理论界;2007年08期
5 春林;;解析美国天价赔偿案[J];法人杂志;2007年06期
6 赵冬;徐瑜;;韩国《消费者保护法》的标本意义[J];消费导刊;2007年08期
7 史蒂文·N·斯sゴ，
本文编号：2510925
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/fashilw/2510925.html
