This policy brief reports on the main conclusions from an international conference held at Wolfson College, Oxford, at which representatives from seven governments, ombudsmen, and academic experts assessed efforts to implement new dispute resolution mechanisms across EU Member States.
The briefing also assesses the levels of trust the public holds in ombudsmen, and what drives this trust. It finds a number of mechanisms under development, and makes a range of recommendations for future approaches.
This policy brief addresses alternative dispute resolution mechanisms in Europe to propose an integrated, holistic approach to encompass the range of mechanisms for resolving disputes, including ombudsmen, compensation schemes, business codes of conduct, complaint boards, and other pathways.
In response to the increase in collective redress, a European alternative to US-style class actions is presented by way of a model for the alignment of the various existing systems to promote good practice.
This Policy Brief summarizes the findings of a joint project between Oxford University and the Catholic University of Leuven aimed at evaluating different mechanisms for delivering collective redress. It identifies eleven principles for market regulation, and the three principal goals for collective redress of delivering compensation, affecting the future behaviour of markets, and achieving these goals in a timely and cost-efficient way.
What do we want from medical technology, and how can we get it?
The complexity of the regulatory framework and the impact of a small number of high-profile failures, notably the PIP breast implant scandal, have led to widespread misunderstanding among heath-care professionals and patients alike regarding the regulation of medical devices. This policy brief addresses a series of interrelated questions on how regulatory reform in the European Medical Devices sector should proceed.