4. How Do the Member States of the European Union Deal with Mass Harm Situations?

This chapter examines the emerging landscape of European collective redress and addresses the sub-question how Member States of the European Union deal with mass harm situations. The European approach to mass harm is a preference for public instead of private enforcement of the law. This explains why the new EU legislation on collective redress in Directive (EU) 2020/1828 is solely consumer oriented and not universal (trans-substantive). EU Legislation on collective redress in the EU belongs to minimum harmonisation, allowing national particularities in every EU Member State to exist. It is, however, possible to find some common elements. EU collective redress is characterised by qualified entities acquiring standing in a more restrictive manner than in the US. Qualified entities are deemed to be at the same time a replacement of entrepreneurial lawyers and a bar to entrepreneurial lawyering as profit or gainful activity is prohibited. Traditionally in many European jurisdictions, lawyers are considered officers of justice and cannot engage in entrepreneurial business. Contingency fees (pactum de quota litis) are not yet generally accepted in the EU. The EU apply cost-shifting rules in collective redress (costs follow the event, the loser pays principle).