我国消费公益诉讼实证分析--兼论《欧盟集体救济建议》之借鉴  

Empirical Analysis of China's Consumer Public Interest Litigation and the References of the EU Collective Redress Recommendation

作　　者：范晓亮[1,2,3] Fan Xiao-liang

机构地区：[1]安徽大学法学院 [2]安徽大学经济法制研究中心 [3]安徽大学欧盟研究中心

出　　处：《苏州大学学报（法学版）》2016年第3期64-75,共12页Journal of Soochow University：Law Edition

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“《涉外民事关系法律适用法》在跨国金融服务合同纠纷中的实施问题研究”(项目编号:13CFX112);2013年安徽大学博士科研启动项目“跨国金融服务合同法律适用问题研究”(项目编号:01001913)的阶段性研究成果

摘　　要：欧盟集体救济的立法探索,体现了欧盟对通过诉讼程序进行消费者权益救济的重视。我国的消费公益诉讼初步入法,已经开始有诉讼案件发生,2015年浙江省消费者权益保护委员会诉上海铁路局案、上海市消费者权益保护委员会诉天津三星和广东欧珀公司案开启了我国消费公益诉讼的局面,但在制度层面仍有需要改进之处。2013年出台,现即将进入评估阶段的《欧盟集体救济建议》作为一份良好的范本,可在法律依据、受理条件、原告主体、被告主体、诉讼请求、立案条件、证据责任、法院管辖、诉讼资金、胜诉酬金、风险代理、告知程序与替代性争议解决等方面提供借鉴,以推动我国立法和实践的完善。The legislative development of collective redress in the EU reflects the importance of litigation procedure attached to consumers＇ interest redress. China has just adopted the consumer public interest litigation in the legislation and relevant cases are initiated. The case of Consumer Protection Association of Zhejiang Province v. Shanghai Railway Samsung ＆ Guangdong OPPO Bureau and the case of Consumer Protection Association of Shanghai v. Tianjin are landmarks of China＇s consumer public communities are lack of experiences and more work still needs to be done interest litigation. However, the legal to improve the operation of the public interest litigation. The EU Collective Redress Recommendation, promulgated in 2013 and currently under the evaluation process, could be a good example in terms of the admissions, litigation claim, evidence, litigation fund, relations with public organ, alternative dispute resolution, etc.

关 键 词：消费者 欧盟 群体性诉讼 集体救济 公益诉讼 

分 类 号：D923.9[政治法律—民商法学]