Abstract

The transposition period for the Damages Directive (104/2014/EU) ended on 26 December 2016. In terms of its temporal scope, the Directive prohibits the retroactive application of substantive provisions prior to that date but leaves it to the discretion of Member States whether to apply procedural provisions to proceedings initiated at any day after 26 December 2014. This distinction raises two questions: First, what is the legal nature of the Directive’s provisions and which provisions form part of procedural and which of substantive law? Second, is the determination of substantive law provisions as opposed to procedural law provisions a matter of domestic law or EU law? This paper attempts to answer those questions for the Directive’s provisions in relation to the statute of limitations, the burden of proof and the disclosure regime. It argues that the legal nature should be determined by EU law and studies whether Member States’ transposition has deviated from the classification under EU law. The analysis finds divergence in the temporal applicability of the new rules and conflicts with the determination of rules under EU law.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.