关于民间融资的外文翻译英文.docx
《关于民间融资的外文翻译英文.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《关于民间融资的外文翻译英文.docx(20页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
关于民间融资的外文翻译英文
FINANCINGCIVILLITIGATION
THECASEFORTHEASSIGNMENTANDSECURITIZATION
OFLIABILITYCLAIMS
AndreaPinna
Institutdedroitdesaffairesinternationales
Abstract
Thispaperexaminesthepossibilityoffinancingcivillitigationbywayoftheassignmentofaliabilityclaimtoaninvestor,whichwould“acquire”theclaimandbringaclaimincompensationonitsownnameandbehalf.Thestartingpointoftheresearchistheobservationthatif,intheory,therightforcompensationisconsideredtobeafundamentalright,inpractice,itsimplementationconsiderablylackseffectivenessespeciallyinconsiderationofthefinancialbarriersforaccessingjustice.Thehypotheticalexaminedisthesituationinwhichaninjuredpartyofatortorabreachofcontract(theassignor)assignstoathirdparty(theassignee)itsrightsagainstaliablepartyinexchangeofremuneration.Themainfeatureofthesystemisthattheinjuredpartyreceivescompensationbywayofpaymentofthepricefortheclaimbeforearulingontheliabilityandthemeasureofdamageshavebeenmade.Thereforetheassigneemakesariskybargainbecauseheisnotsurethatthepossibleproceedsderivingfromthelawsuitwillcoveritsinvestment.Thisishoweverprimafacieasoundsystemsincetheassignee,beforeacquiringaclaimandforthedeterminationoftheconsideration,willcarefullyassessthechancestowinthelawsuitandthedamagesthatcouldbeawardedbycourts.Naturally,theconsiderationfortheassignmentaninvestorispreparedtopayislowerthantheamountoftheanticipatedproceedsofthelawsuitsinceitsdeterminationincorporatesboththeriskoflosingthelawsuitandthedifferenceintimebetweenthepaymentofthepriceandtheexpectedgainfrominvestment.Thistechniqueoffinancingcivillitigationhasnotbeenusedinpracticesofar,atleastnotonalargescale.Thisnaturallyraisestwomainquestions.Thefirstoneistodeterminewhethertheassignmentofliabilityclaimsforspeculationpurposesislegallyadmissibleoriscontrarytopublicpolicy.Europeanlegalsystemsaredividedontheissue,whichisshownbyacomparisonbetweenEnglishandFrenchlaw.Eitherdelegelataordelegeferenda,thesecondissueistodeterminewhetherthesystemiseconomicallyviableanddesirable.Theauthortakespositioninfavoroftheassignmentofliabilityclaimsespeciallyasasolutiontotheabsenceofothertechniques,suchasmandatorydamageinsurance,compensationschemesorclassactions,whichalreadyaimatfindinganalternativetothetraditionalwayofseekingcompensationforaninjuredparty,thatistoindividuallyclaimforitincourt.
Oneoftheadvantagesoftheassignmentofliabilityclaimsoverothertechniquesofreceivingcompensationistotechnicallyenabletohaverecoursetofinancialmarketsbythesecuritizationofsuchclaims.Thisfacilitatestheraisingofcapitalforfinancingcivillitigationandallowsthetransferoftheriskrelatedtoliabilityclaimsatlowtransactioncosts.Naturally,the
inconveniencesofthistechniqueoffinancingcivillitigationandofthesecuritizationofclaimsshouldnotbeunderestimated.
1.Introduction
1.1.Thefundamentalvalueoftherightforcompensationanditsimplementation.
TherightforaninjuredpartyofatortiousorcontractualwrongdoingtoreceivecompensationwasgrantedinEuropeafundamentalvalue.TheEuropeanCourtofHumanRightshasindeeddecidedthatacreditfordamagesderivingfromawrongdoing,i.e.aliabilitycreditorliabilityclaim,isagoodforthepurposeofapplicationofProtocol1oftheEuropeanConventionofHumanRights.However,inpractice,theimplementationofthisfundamentalrightisfarfrombeingsatisfactory.Severaltypesoflossesdonotreceivecompensationbecauseofthepracticaldifficultiesandthecostsnecessarytoachieveit.Thetraditionalwayforaninjuredpartytoseekcompensationistobringaclaimdirectlyandindividuallyincourt.Inthelastdecades,legalsystemshavedevelopedalternativemechanismstograntcompensationwithoutexposingtheinjuredpartytotheburdensofalawsuit:
compensationschemeshavebeenimplementedwithregardtoparticulartypesoflosses,theinsurerissometimesobligedtooffertheinjuredpartyacompensationwithouthavingbeensuedorevenhavingbeenrequestedtodoso.Inotherlegalsystems,thelawsuithasbecomeanindustryforlawyerswhoareentitledtoexclusivelyfinancethelawsuitandtoberemuneratedonlyincaseofsuccessontheproceedsofsuchaction,eventhoughthisisnotacommonacceptedruleforEuropeanlegalsystems.Noritisthepossibilityforindividualstobringaclaimalsoonbehalfofalargergroupofvictimsinasimilarsituation,theso-calledclassactions.Wherethesealternativesdonotexist,whichcorrespondstothemostcommonsituation,thecreditorofthecompensationisalwaysobligedtofinancethelawsuitwhereasthepublicmechanismsaimingatgrantingtheaccesstojusticeareclearlyinsufficientandreservedeithertospecificlawsuitsortoindividualsinparticularfinancialdistress.
1.2.Theconsiderationsfordecidingwhethertobringaclaimornot.
Asaconsequenceofthis,thedecisiontobringaclaimforcompensationistakeninconsiderationofotherelementsthanthemeremeritoriouscharacteroftheclaim.Indeed,theplaintiff,winningalawsuit,canonlyinfewlegalsystems,suchasEngland,beawardedofasumcorrespondingtotherealcostsspentforthelitigationasadditionaldamages.Whereasinmanylegalsystemsthisisnotconsideredtobeaheadofloss,inothers,courts?
practicehaslimitedthecompensationtoaverylowsum,incomparablewiththeeffectivepricepaidforhavingthe
plaintiff?
srightsenforced.Theobserverthereforefacesanunusualsituationwheretherightsofthevictimsarenowadaysparticularlysophisticated,whereasthetechniquesfortheirprotectionhavehardlyevolvedsinceseveralcenturies.
1.3.Theexampleofthecompensationofthelossesderivingfrombreachofcompetitionlaw.
ThedebaterelatedtotherecentinitiativeoftheEuropeanCommissiononDamagesActionsforBreachofECAntitrustRules7hasshownthisparadoxandincoherenceofEuropeanlegalsystems:
extremelyprotectiveofthevictimsintheorythesystemisprofoundlyinefficientin
practice.TherecentconvictionofthethreeFrenchmobilephonesoperatorsforillegalundertakingtoseveralmillionsofpublicpenalties8hasshowntheimpossibilityfortheconsumers–thedirectvictims–ofthisillegalbehaviortobegrantedcompensationforthelosssuffered.Intheabsenceofaclassaction-likemechanismtoaggregatethousandsofsmallindividualclaims,almostnoindividualclaimswerebroughtandconsumerassociationcouldnotprovideasurrogatecompensationmechanismsincetheycannotfreelyadvertisetohaveconsumeradheretotheclaimtheybring.9Nowadays,publicenforcementofcompetitionlawistheonlyeffectiveproceedingavailableandprivateenforcementisextremelylimitedinpractice.Theexampleofthemechanismsforprivateenforcementofcompetitionlawshowsmorebroadlythateachcitizenisownerofaportfolioofcreditsindamagesthathecannot,inpractice,takeadvantageof,intheexpectationthattheprescriptionplaysitsinexorablerole.
1.4.Thehypothesisofassigningdamagesclaims.
Fromthisremarkandintheactualabsenceofefficientalternatives,onecouldexploretheideaofmakingamoreusefulemploymentofthesecreditsindamagesbysimplysellingthemtosomeonewhoiswillingandabletomakeamoreefficientuseofthem.Aliketraditionalcreditsofaliquidatedsumofmoney,whichcanbefreelyassigned,areunliquidatedclaimssusceptibleofassignment?
Primafacie,thistechniquepresentsseveraladvantages.Ifsuchadamagesclaimcouldbeofinterestforaninvestor,theoriginalowneroftheliabilityclaim–thevictim–,byassigningit,willnothavetopersonallyfinancethelawsuitnortobeartheriskoflosingthelegalaction.Moreover,theassignorwillreceivecompensationforitslossfasterthaninthetraditionalcourseofaction,i.e.byindividuallyclaimingdamages.10Indeed,thepricepaidbytheinvestorasconsiderationfortheassignmentwouldreplacethecompensationforthelossthatwouldbejudiciallyawarded.Thepricewouldbenecessarylowerthantheamountofthedamages,butitwouldbepaidinexchangeoftheabsenceofanycostandriskforthejudicialprocedureandwouldbegiventothevictimbyanticipation.Thisanticipationseemstobesusceptibleofincitingtheinjuredpartiestoassigntheirdamagesclaimsandtheinvestortospeculateonthechronologicaldifferencebetweentheinvestmentandtheexpectedgainfromthisinvestment.Therefore,theintrinsicworthoftheassignmentofliabilityclaimsappeartoberealwithcomparisontothetraditionalmechanismsofcompensationofacontractualortortiousloss.
1.5.Thecomparisonwithothertechniquesforseekingcompensation.
Threemaintechniquesforseekingcompensationofalossareofferedbylegalsystems.Traditionally,thevictimalwayshastherighttoindividuallyclaimforcompensationincourt,seekinganawardfordamages.Alternatively,insomecases,privateorpubliccompensationschemesareestablishedinordertograntcompensationwithoutrequiringaliabilityclaimtobebroughttocourtagainstthewrongdoer.Indeed,themainroleofacompensationschemeistograntcompensationtoaninjuredpartyevenifnowrongwascommitted.However,practicehasshownthatcompensationschemesalsointervenewhenawrongdoercanbeidentifiedandthataftercompensatingthevictim,theschemeissubrogatedintherightsofthe