MEPLI Roundtable on Smart Regulation of European Private Law
The goal of this workshop is to assess how the better regulation agenda has shaped/can shape European private law, to assess the contribution of different approaches to achieve ‘better regulation’ and to assess opportunities and threats for European private law, in particular in respect with developments in self-regulation and co-regulation.
MEPLI’s first roundtable (June 2011) was on an evergreen topic – methodology in European property law. Its second (Dec 2o11) dealt with the proposed Common European Sales Law, which had (then) just been published. The third (June 2012) was on choice and competition in international sales law. The topics chosen were well within the realm of private law. MEPLI’s most recent roundtable (Oct 2012), hosted jointly with MCEL, departs from its comfort zone to consider the European public/private divide. Our next conference is along the same theme, and may appeal to both public and private lawyers alike.
Organised by Dr Kristel de Smedt, it is a full-day conference entitled ‘Smart Regulation of European Private Law”, taking place on 18 January 2003 at the Maastricht Law Faculty. As usual, attendance is free but please register to k.desmedt[at]maastrichtuniversity.nl with your name and designation by 11 January 20013. This is since space is limited.
Synopsis
Private law in Europe has undergone a significant transformation during the last two decades. From a branch of law that was scarcely affected by EU legislation, it has become the object of considerable harmonisation measures in order to achieve uniformity in the laws of the member states to facilitate free trade and protect European citizens. Simultaneously, in the past decade, there has been an increased attention for ‘better regulation’ in the EU, inspired by similar and earlier attempts in the US. The term better regulation is vague, but can be understood as a desire to improve the quality of legislation by better evaluating its likely economic, social and environmental impacts and to achieve a ‘simplified’ regulatory environment. The efforts of the European Commission to improve legislation and to reduce administrative burdens for industry have lead to a regulatory environment, in which formal intervention is more limited and self-regulation and co-regulation have emerged as alternatives. The goal of this workshop is to assess how the better regulation agenda has shaped/can shape European private law, to assess the contribution of different approaches to achieve ‘better regulation’ and to assess opportunities and threats for European private law, in particular in respect with developments in self-regulation and co-regulation.
Programme
9.30-10.00: Coffee and registration
10.00- 10.15: Welcome and Introduction
10.15-10.30: The goals of European Private Law – Prof Jan Smits
10.30-10.45: Smart regulation of EU private law and the contribution of Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) – Dr A Renda
10.45- 11.15: Discussion
11.15-11.30: Coffee and tea
11.30- 11.45: Smart Regulation and Behavioral Research – Prof. Dr. A. Alemanno
11.45-12.00: Smart regulation: the private abuse of the public interest – Dr. Kristel De Smedt
12.00-12.30: Discussion
12.30-13.30: Lunch
13.30-13.45: New instruments for better regulation of private law: soft law, the ultimate solution? – Prof. dr. Linda Senden and Prof. dr. Anne Keirse
13.45-14.00: What have policy-makers learned? Evaluating the performance of regulatory policy. A political science perspective. – Prof. dr. C. Radaelli
14.00-14.30: Discussion
14.30-14.45: Regulatory contracts: recasting the debate on European regulatory instruments – Prof. dr. F. Cafaggi
14.45-15.00: Case-study: smart regulation of consumer law. ‘Smart or smirk? The regulation of nanotechnology. – Prof G van Calster
15.00-15.30: Discussion
15.30-15.45: Case-study: smart regulation in the financial sector – Prof. dr. A. Pacces.
15.45-16.15: Case-study: ‘Regulating the European market for contract law: harmonization or standardization?’ – Dr. Ann-Sophie Vandenberghe.
16.15-16.30: Discussion
16.30-16.45: Conclusions
16.45: Drinks
Other blogs:
Also read
-
Every time consumers use online email, stream music or videos or archive pictures on the internet, it is quite likely that they are using cloud computing. Those online pictures, videos or emails are not stored on consumer’s computers. Instead, they are processed and stored on a group of remotely...
-
M-EPLI was delighted to have Professor Vanessa Mak in Maastricht to discuss her research on consumer law and policy at the M-EPLI Talk on February 6th.
-
The pain and suffering of accident victims does not have a price and, in claims for damages, no fixed economic value. Thus, quantifying the amount of money needed to compensate for pain and suffering is a subjective exercise often influenced by adjudicators’ biases.