Diana Wallis (President European Law Institute, former Vice-President European Parliament)

Lezing

Seminar 'Justice Adrift; the EU legislator and ADR, is there some Confusion?'

Abstract

With the implementation date this July 2015 of the ADR Directive 2013/11 it might appear as if the aim of EU civil justice policy as stated in the Tampere Council Conclusions in 1999 of creating “a genuine area of justice, where people can approach courts and authorities in any Member State as easily as in their own” has finally been ushered in. An analysis of the points of contrast between the Mediation Directive, which was a justice instrument, with the ADR Directive, which is rather an internal market instrument raises questions about the coherence of approach in envisaging a European justice system.  My intention is to enquire into the expressed motivation of the European legislator, especially by examining the legislative process in the European Parliament and the public statements of elected members as to what exactly they were expecting to achieve. Further to look for any of vision of a coherent system of European civil justice within these combined EU ADR structures particularly anticipating the up coming review of the Mediation Direction due next year in May 2016.

Gepubliceerd door  CSECL