The legal status of the class members during the group litigation

Author:

Trezubov Egor S.ORCID,Zvyagina Natalya S.

Abstract

The study discusses certain rules of group litigation in the civil procedure in the context of the legal status of class members in procedural relations. Attention is paid to the rights and obligations of the person who applies to court with a request to protect the rights and legitimate interests of a group of members. Participants in a class action include the person conducting the case (plaintiff-representative) and group members who joined the collective claim. The comparative legal method and teleological interpretation allow to conclude that there are active procedural relations only between the court and the claimant-representative, which predetermines the possibility of performing administrative actions, proving and appealing judicial acts only by the plaintiff, but not by the other claimants. The extremely curtailed scope of powers of the group members is justified by their voluntary joining a class action lawsuit. Relations within a group of persons are substantive in nature; this allows to highlight the necessity of appropriate private material mechanisms to satisfy the interests of the majority of participants under the rules on decisions in meetings. In view of the possibility of consolidating in a class homogeneous but different in size substantive claims of the group members we believe it is essential to establish the majority criterion, regardless of the price of the claim of each member. The research also reveals the contradiction in legal regulation in the event of a refusal to certify a group of persons after the initiation of proceedings on a class action in civil, arbitration and administrative litigation, substantiates the inexpediency of leaving a class action without consideration, and the need to consider personal claims of group members and allocate relevant cases in a separate production, as provided for in the Arbitration (Commercial) Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the gaps in the legal regulation of group proceedings in terms of establishing the amount and procedure for paying the state fee.

Publisher

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia

Reference23 articles.

1. Aiken, A.W. (2017) Class action notice in the digital age. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. (165), 967-1018.

2. Alieskerov, M.A. (2022) Class Action in Adversarial Civil Procedure: Procedural Limits and Restrictions. Herald of Civil Procedure. 12(6), 133-151. https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2022-12-6-133-151 (in Russian).

3. Andrews, N. (2012) The system of civil procedure in England: litigation, mediation and arbitration. Translation from English. Khodykin, R.M. (ed.). University of Cambridge. M.: Infotropic Media Publ. (in Russian).

4. Borisova, A.V. & Kotelnikova, E.A. (2020) Novelties of the Class Action Institution in Russian Civil Proceedings. Arbitragniy I grazhdanskiy process - Commercial and Civil Procedure. (4), 16-19. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-383X-2020-4-16-19 (in Russian).

5. Burbank, S.B. & Wolf, T.B. (2018) Class actions, statutes of limitations and repose, and federal common law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 167(1), 1-70.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Directions for Improving State Judicial Policy in Legal Costs in the Context of Justice Accessibility;Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences;2024-03-14

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3