header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 September 2012 / Pablo Cortes
Issue: 7528 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , ADR
printer mail-detail

The next big thing?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Pablo Cortés provides some thoughts on the proposed consumer ADR & ODR initiatives

At the end of November 2011, the European Commission published two proposals in the field of consumer alternative dispute resolution (ADR). The first one is a Directive on consumer ADR that requires member states to ensure the provision and availability of ADR entities that comply with legal standards for resolving disputes between traders and consumers (COM(2011) 793/2). The second proposal is a Regulation on consumer online dispute resolution (ODR) which requires the establishment of a pan-European ODR platform that will become a single point of entry for resolving online consumer complaints arising from e-commerce (C(2011) 794/2). The platform, which is expected to be fully operational in 2015, will link complainants to approved ADR entities. Both proposals are due to be adopted into law by the end of 2012, and implemented in all member states 18 months later.

The commission proposal

The Directive on consumer ADR

The proposed ADR Directive requires member states to ensure the provision

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll