header-logo header-logo

11 March 2010 / Erich Suter
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Features , Mediation
printer mail-detail

As one door opens...another closes

Erich Suter sets out the European view of enforced mediation

Advocate General Kokott gave her opinion in Rosalba Alassini (Environment and consumers: C-317/08–C-320/08) dealing with Italy’s implementation of the Universal Service Directive (a directive on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks, Directive 2002/22/EC). 

For those with an obscure fascination in the dealings of the Italian electronic communications networks this article is likely to come as something of a disappointment. It is concerned purely with the legality of a procedural requirement adopted in Italy restricting the rights of end-users to bring claims against service providers to court. Italy in implementing the Universal Service Directive—which requires an out-of-court settlement procedure—decided to introduce a mandatory requirement that any end-user wishing to bring a claim against a service provider is obliged first to go through an out-of-court disputes process to try to achieve a settlement. If they do not they are barred from presenting a claim to the court. The end-users in these cases were complaining that the courts’ refusal to hear their

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll