One of very few EU countries without a special legal regulation of that topic Why? Other possibilities?

EU Directive on AR for Consumer Disputes – to be adopted until the end of 2012 National implementation envisaged by the middle of

2014

The present legal basis (very general)

The Mediaton in Civil and Commercial Cases Act (lex generalis)

The Alternative Resolution of Court Disputes Act – lex specialis for court-attached ADR

Need for a specific statute

Not yet in a parliamentary procedure The amount of money needed for the adoption of

such was not envisaged in the draft – budget problems; austerity measures?

Prepared by the Consumer Protection Office (cancelled by the Gov. and joined with the Ministry of Economy: the Consumer Protection Sector) The de-facto strongest consumers’ organisation in

SLO is the ‘Slovene Consumer Association’ (NGO)

Their specific character Actual inequality between the consumer and

the trader Financial resources, experience, knowledge of law (one

shot litigant v. repeat player)

Property value of a consumer dispute usually too low to be worth commencing judicial proceedings Too big costs of the proceedings, too much time wasted

Special importance of ADR Possibility of a fast, simple and effective resolution

of consumer disputes

if a previous attempt to reach an agreement between a consumer and a trader was not successful

Basic principles (from the EU Commision’s recommendations) Voluntariness Peaceful dispute resolution Legality Adversariness Transparency Effectiveness Respresentation Economical and fast procedure Independence

Independent, permanent In the framework of the National Consumer

Protection Office (state body) Now within the Ministry of Economy (executive power)?

The value of a dispute to be resolved EUR 40 – 5000

Not less – triviality Except in model proceedings („mass“ disputes)

Not more – better to commence classical civil proceedings

The draft law stimulates the establishment of private schemes for ARCD (at various business associations with participation of consumer protection organisations)

Proposer – only the consumer – Why not the trader? If he/she previously submitted their request for

redress to the trader Minimal fee of EUR 20 (otherwise a free-of-charge

procedure)

Written procedure (exceptionally oral) Why?

Oral in model procedures

President and vice-president – to fullfil the conditions for a local court judge ? (permanence of office + panel members of the arbitration board)

Agreement made in a written form (reasoned decision) If both parties, especially the trader, agree – binding

(the power of an arbitration decision) The effect of enforceability (final and enforcable)

Could be challenged at the court for certain reasons (illegality, violation of ius cogens, public order)

Nobody can be forced to accept its decision as binding (Art. 23 of the SLO Constitution – the right to judicial protection)

Subsidiary application of provisons of the Arbitration Act ???

If special aribtrations established must be approved by this arbitration board

Request for the protection of consumer interests may be filed by a consumer organisation Requesting that a certain type of advertising be

stopped, certain application of general conditions of operation, contract provisions, or business practices be ceased

If a detrimental activity affects the position and rights of consumers in another EU member state (cross-border consumer protection) The request for redress may be filed by an

organisation or independent public body (e.g. consumer obmudsman) that is according to the regulation of that state established for the protection of rights and interests of consumers in that state

Joint request for redress against the same trader (of more than 50 individual requests) the same or crucially similar factual situation and

legal basis 1 procedure

Could be less than EUR 40, but more than EUR 10

The proposal for an EU Directive

Prior to that Commission‘s recommendations General mediation directive for civil and commercial

cases

To be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council

Gaps of coverage, lack of consumer and business awareness, uneven quality of ADR procedures

Especially in the contetxt of cross-border transactions (language barriers, potentially higher costs, differences between member states) Especially „e-transactions“ (internet)

Also a preliminary step to further develop collective ADR procedures within the Union (protecting consumer collective interests)

European Consumer Centers – assistance for consumers guiding them to ADR entities especially in cases of cross-border disputes To cooperate with national authorities

ADR entities must provide information of their services on their website, must also enable electronic communication

Monitoring of this structure – by a state competent authority

The Directive to be transposed in 18 months from the date of its entry into force

The SLO Draft Law to be slightly modified and put into the parliamentary procedure