5. Are Transplants Possible in EU Models of Collective Redress

This chapter delves into the comparison of US and EU models of collective redress, focusing on whether Europeans can draw lessons from the US approach. It begins by exploring the historical context and the emergence of European collective redress, influenced by the US class action model. The chapter employs microcomparison and macrocomparison methods to assess the feasibility of transplanting US class action elements into the EU framework. Microcomparison involves comparing specific legal solutions intended to deal with particular problems, such as lead plaintiffs in the US versus qualified entities in the EU. Macrocomparison, on the other hand, examines the different techniques of dispute resolution and the broader societal and legal contexts in which these models operate. The chapter presents case studies, including the PIP breast implant scandal and Dieselgate, to illustrate the differences and similarities between the US and EU approaches. It also discusses the structural differences between US adversarial legalism and European Eurolegalism, highlighting the challenges and opportunities in adopting elements of the US class action model within the EU. The chapter concludes by evaluating the potential for transplanting specific elements of the US model into the EU framework, considering the normative framework set by the Directive (EU) 2020/1828 and the external policy standards that shape the EU's approach to collective redress.