Research Beatrix Vanlerberghe

Abstract

Despite the wealth that a large proportion of our society is living in, many European households are unable to repay their debts. Their creditors might find themselves in an equally difficult position as they need payment to avoid getting into debt themselves. Debt collectors take full advantage of this and proceed to consumer debt collection at high costs. This leads to an accumulation of debt costs which in turn pushes the debtor into a negative spiral of escalating debts and ultimately into poverty. The urgent need to stop this negative spiral has been expressed by legal scholars and practitioners in many European jurisdictions. The current legislative approach is insufficient and fragmented. In times where debts are on the rise due to the pandemic, SUSTDEBT answers the compelling call for action. Sustainable debt collection pays attention to both efficiency and ethical concerns. SUSTDEBT takes a bifold approach to appropriately address the multiple challenges of consumer debt collection. First, starting from a fundamental rights analysis, combined with insights stemming from comparative law and an empirical study, SUSTDEBT will define and conceptualise efficient and ethical debt collection. Secondly, the project will put forward guidelines to shape a new sustainable debt collection process. Both outcomes will contribute significantly to the elaboration of an efficient and ethical debt collection approach in Belgium and the EU.

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: Vanlerberghe Beatrix
• Co-promoter: Rutten Stefan
• Co-promoter: Vandenhole Wouter
• Co-promoter: Vanmeenen Melissa

Research team(s)

• Law Enforcement

Project type(s)

• Research Project

Abstract

The project relates to the procedural justice in Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). ODR was heralded as a solution for certain classes of disputes that were not otherwise appropriately addressed, and as a means for introducing efficiency and new qualities into the practice of dispute resolution, such as optimization of win-win solutions. The question is, has ODR actually delivered on those promises? To answer this question, a critical look at the current ODR landscape is needed. A litmus test for the quality of ODR mechanisms of today is their delivery of procedural justice. Relying on the existing practices, this project aims to explore the ways to ensure procedural justice in three most common ODR processes presently, namely online negotiation, mediation and arbitration. The project will follow a multi-method methodology and will combine doctrinal analysis with empirical research. It will start by examining the notion of procedural justice in ODR and how it can be measured. The empirical part of the project will involve mapping the existing and active ODR providers globally (the amount of which is not expected to exceed one hundred) and exploring how they ensure procedural justice in online negotiation, mediation and arbitration. Finally, relying on the collected doctrinal and empirical data, the project will evaluate the key criteria for ensuring procedural justice in online negotiation, mediation and arbitration. By examining the issue of the procedural justice in ODR, the project will partially fill the existing void within the academic research on the implications of technology for procedural justice theory. By mapping active ODR providers globally and identifying ODR processes that they provide, the project will remedy the current absence of any up-to-date information on these issues. Thereby, the project will make a significant and original contribution to the growing body of literature on ODR. In addition, it will help increase awareness of the general public about the ways ODR providers ensure procedural justice in online negotiation, mediation and arbitration. ODR providers can benefit from the project's results by aligning their procedural justice standards with the identified key criteria. In this way, the project will boost the public's confidence in the fairness of the provided ODR processes, a paramount condition for the development of ODR in the future.

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: Rutten Stefan
• Co-promoter: Nigmatullina Dilyara
• Co-promoter: Vanlerberghe Beatrix
• Fellow: Beretta Rachele

Research team(s)

• Law Enforcement

Project type(s)

• Research Project

Abstract

This research project concerns the question of the current role of the Belgian Supreme Court, also in the light of the judicial dialogue with other (European) supreme courts, and what this role should ideally be. In order to answer the main research question, the research starts with an analysis of the legislation and doctrine on the current role and functioning of the Belgian Supreme Court, also in the light of the interaction of other (European) supreme courts, such as the Constitutional Court, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. A similar analysis will be carried out for the French, the Dutch and the German supreme court. From this classical legal and comparative law research, a general theoretical framework can be outlined on the role and functioning of the supreme courts mentioned above. Furthermore, the research project aims to investigate how the judicial dialogue between the supreme courts mentioned above (national versus European) takes place in practice and what the influence of this dialogue is on national case law. On the basis of a case study of judgments from the court of cassation in Belgium, France, the Netherlands and Germany, it will be assessed to what extent the supreme courts deal with the case law of the (European) supreme courts. Three formal instruments of judicial dialogue will be used as a starting point: (1) the preliminary ruling procedure, (2) implicit and explicit reference to case law of other courts and (3) the motivation of judicial decisions. From the theoretical framework, an attempt will further be made to draw up a list of measures, implemented or not, formulated to reform the specific supreme court . The theoretical framework, the analysis of case law and the drawn up list will subsequently form the basis of empirical research, in which the role of the Belgian Supreme Court will be tested against the findings of the magistrates and lawyers from practice. Finally, this multi-methodological study will attempt to formulate recommendations in order to push the current role of the Belgian Supreme Court in the direction of the role it should ideally fulfil in practice, also in order to function as an ideal interlocutor in a layered legal landscape.

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: Rutten Stefan
• Co-promoter: Vanlerberghe Beatrix

Research team(s)

• Law Enforcement

Project type(s)

• Research Project

Abstract

New tendencies indicate that judicial transitional law is at the verge of a new evolution, calling for further research this project will focus in particular on two research questions which will lead to concrete directives for both policy makers and legal practice Research Question 1: What are the theoretical foundations and policy arguments for the principal temporal function of' judgments? Research Question 2. What arguments justify in the practice of courts a modulation of the temporal effects of judgments?

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: Popelier Patricia
• Co-promoter: Vanheule Dirk
• Co-promoter: Vanlerberghe Beatrix

Research team(s)

• Government and Law

Project type(s)

• Research Project