A European Contract Law, or an EU Contract Law Regulation for Consumers?

Abstract

The paper informs about initiatives of the EC Commission to create a set of instruments for advancing a European contract law, in particular a “common frame of reference.” It questions the underlying assumptions in the still somewhat unclear and open Commission communications. It doubts whether EU has any competence to harmonise contract law under the internal market jurisdiction of Art. 95 EC. As an alternative, it proposes the elaboration and eventual adoption of an EU consumer contract law regulation (ECCLR) based on Art. 153 (3) b) EC which would take direct effect and be limited to minimal, yet directly applicable rules on consumer protection in contract law. Copyright Springer 2005

Business-to-Consumer Harassment, Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the UK—A Distorted Picture of Uniform Harmonization?

“…429-432, 2010. With a few exceptions (for example, Hondius 2010) commentators have been largely critical of maximum harmonization with some suggesting targeted harmonization directives instead (Ackermann 2010;Faure 2008;Micklitz and Reich 2009;Reich 2005;Rott and Terryn 2009;Twigg-Flesner 2010;Wilhelmsson 2008). Some scholars have also questioned the effectiveness of using directives in consumer protection.…”

“…Some scholars have also questioned the effectiveness of using directives in consumer protection. Reich (2005) and Twigg-Flesner (2010) for example, prefer regulations because the essential nature of directives which requires national transposition exacerbates disparities and promotes inconsistent national laws and incoherent applications. However, it is important to examine the pioneering role of the UCPD in order to assess whether the Commission's new approach actually succeeds in removing disparities in national law.…”

“…The paper proceeds on the basis that the extent of harmonization is determined by the content of a directive. It does not examine whether regulations should replace directives as consumer protection tools (Reich 2005;Twigg-Flesner 2010) or the merits of full harmonization (Howells 2002(Howells , 2007Howells and Wilhelmsson 2003;Karsten and Sinai 2003;Stuyck et al 2006, pp. 115-117;Twigg-Flesner and Parry 2007, pp.…”

Time to Do the Job Properly—The Case for a New Approach to EU Consumer Legislation

“…The idea of replacing directives with a regulation is not a new one, of course-Professor Reich made a strong case for this in 2005, basing his reasoning predominantly on the drawbacks of using directives (Reich 2005). The difference between Professor Reich's argument and the one presented in this paper is mainly in respect of the scope such a regulation should adopt.…”

“…22 The additional advantage in Article 169(4) TFEU, according to which any measures adopted on the basis of Article 169(2)(b) only have minimum harmonization character would not be relevant as the EUCTR proposed here would only be of cross-border application. Contrast Reich (2005). this regulation might be.…”