English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

While redress in chains of contracts is addressed by Directive 1999/44 (Consumer Sales Directive) and the Member States’ national laws implementing the former, the European Commission proposal for a Common European Sales Law (CESL) does not provide for any redress safeguards. Rather, it appears that the CESL overlooked the issue. Considering that the CESL is an opt-in instrument and that its primary goal is to protect and encourage small and medium sized companies (SME) to make the most out of the internal market, the CESL’s non-approach to the redress issue may prove to be a significant hindrance to an opt-in. After setting out the context of liability in chains of contracts and assessing the potential approaches to it, the article discusses the specific problems of redress in cross-border cases before examining more closely the CESL’s approach to redress scenarios and possible solutions to the problem. The examination of the redress issue as a matter of substantive law is supplemented by an excursus on the procedural safeguards of redress in cross-border cases.

Redress in Europe and the Trap under the CESL