Herald of Civil Procedure
RU
EN
main-photo

We in a citing index:

subscribe bluebook itunes twitter vk youtube
library ulrichs-webGoogleСнимок экрана 2015-12-25 в 19.31.28.pngCrossref.pngVAK logo.pngHEIN logo.png

Class-Action Lawsuit in Russia: «Second Chance» under the Concept

D.S. Chernyy,
Attorney-at-Law, Partner at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm 

A.N. Khizunova,
Associate at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm 

P.K. Rusetsky,
Junior Associate at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm 


In this article authors make an attempt to analyze the provisions of the Concept of Unified Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation regarding the improvement of proceedings in group (class) actions in Russia. According to court practice in Russia, the provisions of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation about the class actions do not work in practice, as the courts interpret them in such a way that the effective application of these provisions to protect the rights and legitimate interests of a group of persons is not possible. At this point in accordance with US law suit can be qualified as a group (class) action in the case where such a lawsuit is filed to protect the interests of a large group of potential claimants and (or) offered to one (several) persons constituting the largest group of respondents. In France, the new Consumer Rights Protection Law provides about class actions that consumers should be in similar or identical situations and as a general base their claims to be a violation of one or more persons with treaty obligations. Consequently, in the judicial proceedings under class actions it is really are talking about «community», homogeneity, typicality. It seems that offered under the terms of the Concept of qualification of the claim as a group in the presence of similar objects and bases of the claims of group members will eliminate some formal interpretation of the «single legal relationship» as complicity. 

Keywords: group action; class action; Concept of the Unified Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.


References
 
  Martin D. The Rise and Fall of the Class-Action Lawsuit // The New York Times. 1988. Jan. 8 (available at: http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/08/us/the-law-the-rise-andfall-of-the-class-action-lawsuit.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm). 
  Valdes F. Procedure, Policy and Power: Class Actions and Social Justice in Historical and Comparative Perspective // Georgia State University Law Review. 2007–2008. Vol. 24. Issue 3. P. 630 (available at: http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.c gi?article=2349&context=gsulr). 
  Ancheta A.N. Defendant Class Actions and Federal Civil Rights Litigation// UCLA Law Review. 1985. Vol. 33. P. 283 (available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1582&context=facpubs). 
 Hamdani A., Klement A. The Class Defense (Discussion Paper No. 3) (http://www. law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/fellows_papers/pdf/Hamdani_et%20al_3.pdf). 
   Melnick K. In Defense of the Class Action Lawsuit: An Examination of the Implicit Advantages and a Response to Common Criticisms // Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development. 2008. Vol. 22. Issue 3. P. 757–758 (available at: http://scholarship. law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&context=jcred). 
  Gidi A. Class Actions in Brazil – A Model for Civil Law Countries // American Journal of Comparative Law. 2003. Vol. 51. P. 315 (available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/ abstract_id=903188). Overview of existing collective redress schemes in EU Member States (http://www. europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201107/20110715ATT24242/20110715 ATT24242EN.pdf).   Commission recommends Member States to have collective redress mechanisms in place to ensure access to justice (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/civil/ news/130611_en.htm). 
 D’Angelo Chr.S., Canfield J.E. France and Belgium adopt class actions spring 2014 (http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8443e157-67f8-4970-947d- 131379fe12bf). 
   Zabrodin D.M. Gruppovye iski v arbitrazhnom protsesse Rossii: problema edinogo pravootnosheniya [Class Actions in Arbitration Proceedings in Russia: The Problem of a Single Legal Relationship] (in Russian) // Statute. 2013. No. 12. P. 156–162. 
   Dolganichev V.V. K probleme ob’ektivnogo usloviya vozbuzhdeniya gruppovogo proizvodstva [On the Problem of the Objective Condition for the Initiation of Class-Action Lawsuit] (in Russian) // Arbitration and Civil Procedure. 2013. No. 9. P. 44–48. 
   Khodykin R.M. Nekotorye voprosy primeneniya novykh polozhenii Arbitrazhnogo protsessual’nogo kodeksa RF o gruppovom proizvodstve [Some Questions of Application of the New Provisions of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation about Class-Action Lawsuit] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Ural District. 2010. No. 1. P. 132–143. 
   Sullivan E.Th., Floyd C.D., Freer R.D., Clary B.G. Complex Litigation. LexisNexis, 2009. 
  Haar B. Investor protection through model case procedures — implementing collective goals and individual rights under the 2012 Amendment of the German Capital Markets Model Case Act (KapMuG) (Arbeitspapier Nr. 9/2013) (http://papers.ssrn. com/abstract_id=2352248). 
   Wrobel G.G., Waters M.J., Dunn J. Judicial Application of the Twombly/Iqbal Plausibility Standard in Antitrust Cases // Antitrust. 2011. Vol. 26. No. 1 (available at: http:// goo.gl/VWUa7w). 
  Yarkov V.V., Timofeev Yu.A., Khodykin R.M. O proekte glavy 38.1 GPK «Rassmotrenie del o zashchite prav i zakonnykh interesov gruppy lits» [About the Project of Chapter 38.1 of the Civil Procedure Code «Cases of Protection of the Rights and Legitimate Interests of a Group of Persons»] (in Russian) // Arbitration and Civil Procedure. 2012. No. 8. P. 16–19; 2012. No. 9. P. 16–19. 
  Yarkov V.V. Gruppovoi isk: kratkii kommentarii glavy 28.3 APK RF [Class-Action Lawsuit: A Short Commentaty to Chapter 28.3 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. 2010. No. 9(214). P. 7.

Information about the authors 

Chernyy D.S. (Moscow) – Attorney-at-Law, Partner at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm (105005, Moscow, Denisovsky ln., 23, bldg. 6; e-mail: D.Chernyy@ rospravo.ru). 

Khizunova A.N. (Moscow) – Associate at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm (105005, Moscow, Denisovsky ln., 23, bldg. 6; e-mail: [email protected]). 

Rusetsky P.K. (Moscow) – Junior Associate at Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners Law Firm (105005, Moscow, Denisovsky ln., 23, bldg. 6; e-mail: [email protected]).

 el_.png   it_.png   book.png


D.S. Chernyy, A.N. Khizunova, P.K. Rusetsky