SLR Archives - Page 27 of 27

All bark and no bite? Contemporary consumer redress in Latin America

by admin | Oct 27, 2019 | SLR, SLR V30 I1

All bark and no bite? Contemporary consumer redress in Latin America

Authors Manuel A. Gómez

ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: Professor of Law and Associate Dean of International & Graduate Studies at the College of Law, Florida International University
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 30 Issue 1, 2019, p. 61 – 76

Abstract

This article describes the current status of consumer protection in Latin America with particular attention to the recent efforts pursued both at the national and regional levels and the challenges faced. It surveys the landscape of consumer redress in the region and also discusses the use of transnational litigation as a remedial strategy for the shortcomings of the Latin American consumer protection regime. As the article shows, despite many differences among the national legal systems of Latin American countries, there have been some attempts to achieve regional synchronisation. From the CIDIP-VII draft produced under the aegis of the Organization of American States ("OAS"), to the significant effort undertaken by United Nations Conference of Trade and Development ("UNCTAD") with the support of the Swiss government; several countries are now able to coordinate their activities and work toward harmonising their legal regimes. Notwithstanding this optimistic outlook, there are still some important obstacles that stand in the way and that have prevented these modernised consumer protection systems from realising some of its goals. As the article concludes, one possible way to mitigate the existing problems would be if Latin American countries paid more attention to ensuring that consumers have access to local and effective means of judicial protection; in other words, that the existing remedies not only bark but also bite.

← PREVIOUS NEXT →

Regulatory and judicial consumer protection in the United States of America: An assessment

by admin | Oct 27, 2019 | SLR, SLR V30 I1

Regulatory and judicial consumer protection in the United States of America: An assessment

Authors Linda S Mullenix

ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: Morris and Rita Atlas Chair in Advocacy, The University of Texas School of Law
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 30 Issue 1, 2019, p. 33 – 60

Abstract

Consumers in the United States of America are protected through a vast scheme of federal and state regulatory agencies and bureaus. Notwithstanding the existence of an impressive bureaucratic apparatus for consumer protection, a persistent theme among scholars is the relative weakness of regulatory consumer protection in the United States, compared to that of other countries — most notably countries within the European Union. The public awareness of and impetus for robust consumer protection in the United States began in the 1960s, with a consumer movement founded by Ralph Nader. Since the 1960s, numerous consumer interest groups have served as lobbyists and watchdogs for consumer interests, pursuing legislation and instituting remedial actions before relevant agencies and in private litigation. This article explores the complex nature of regulatory consumer protection in the United States, describing the array of federal and state agencies whose mandate is consumer protection. The article explores the authority of these various executive branch bodies to issue rules and regulations, conduct investigations, prosecute and sanction violations of consumer protection laws. In addition to consumer protection authorized under federal law, the article further discusses the power of state attorneys general to pursue parens patriae actions on behalf of state citizens for consumer law violations. In assessing the efficacy of federal and state regulatory powers, the article surveys various legislative, executive, judicial, and political constraints on consumer protection agencies to carry out their missions. Finally, the article turns attention to consumer protection through the judicial system, focusing on individual and aggregate procedural means — especially class action litigation — for private enforcement of consumer protection laws. The article assesses the extent to which private litigation serves to counterbalance the problems associated with alleged weak regulatory enforcement of consumer protection laws.

← PREVIOUS NEXT →

The South African Class Action vs Group Action as an appropriate procedural device

by admin | Oct 27, 2019 | SLR, SLR V30 I1

The South African Class Action vs Group Action as an appropriate procedural device

Authors Theo Broodryk

ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer and Manager: Law Clinic, Stellenbosch University
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 30 Issue 1, 2019, p. 6 – 32

Abstract

In Trustees for the time being of the Children’s Resource Centre Trust v Pioneer Food (Pty) Ltd (Legal Resources Centre as amicus curiae), Wallis JA held that in defining the class it is not necessary to identify all the members of the class otherwise the question would arise whether a class action was necessary as joinder in terms of the court rules would be permissible. He held that what is required is that the class be defined with sufficient particularity that a specific person’s membership can be objectively determined by examining his or her situation in light of the class definition. It can accordingly be inferred that, where the claimants are all identifiable, irrespective of the size of the class, they may need to be joined as plaintiffs to the proceedings. Class action proceedings may therefore not be the appropriate procedural device to be utilised in such circumstances. The problem, however, is that where the class comprises a large group of persons, joinder may be cumbersome and largely unfeasible. This potential problem is significant in that a court ordering joinder in such circumstances could potentially undermine the very foundation for the incorporation of the class action in to South African law, namely, access to justice. The article will accordingly consider what the test is that our courts should apply and what the factors are that it should take into consideration when determining the appropriateness of a class action as opposed to joinder. These issues have not yet been subject to a comprehensive and critical analysis with regard to the procedural approaches of prominent foreign jurisdictions, which is what the article will aim to do.

← PREVIOUS NEXT →