Civilno sodno varstvo razpršenih in kolektivnih interesov

Subject of this thesis are the so-called mass cases (disputes) and the procedural mechanisms for their resolution. The analysis should present whether the traditional civil procedure is (in) adequate method for the protection of rights or interests that cannot be classified as individual, while the comparative analysis of legal systems which have already established collective redress systems should present which model provides satisfactorily results. The comparative analysis includes the legal systems of the United States of America, England and Wales, Sweden and the EU. The aim of the thesis is to present the fact that the Macedonian citizens have no effective right of access to court in the mass cases, because the traditional (individual) civil procedure is an inadequate mechanism for resolution of such cases. Republic of Macedonia is taken as an example of legal system which still does not have established collective redress systems. R. Macedonia may serve as a model for Former Yugoslav republics, because they all share same civil procedure law tradition, and at this moment it may be said that have similar social-economic conditions. Hence, the aim of the thesis is to show the need of reform of the Macedonian civil justice system (as well of the civil justice systems of Former Yugoslav republics) regarding the resolution of these mass cases, particularly the need of reform of the civil procedure. Based on the experiences from the other countries, suggestions are to be given about the directions in which the Macedonian representative litigation model should be tailored.Predmet te teze so t.i. masovni sodni zadevi (spori) in postopkovni mehanizmi za njihovo reševanje. Analiza bi morala pokazati, ali je tradicionalni civilni postopek (ne)ustrezna metoda za zaščito pravic ali interesov, ki jih ni mogoče opredeliti kot posameznikove, medtem ko bi primerjalna analiza pravnih sistemov, ki so že vzpostavila sistem kolektivnih odškodnin, morala pokazati kateri model zagotavlja zadovoljive rezultate. Primerjalna analiza vključuje pravne sisteme Združenih držav Amerike, Anglije in Walesa, Švedske in EU. Namen te teze je predstaviti dejstvo, da Makedonski državljani nimajo učinkovite pravice dostopa do sodišča v masovnih zadevah, ker je tradicionalni (individualni) pravdni postopek neustrezen mehanizem za reševanje tovrstnih primerov. Republika Makedonija je vzeta za primer pravnega sistema, ki še vedno nima vzpostavljenega sistema kolektivnih odškodnin. Republika Makedonija lahko služi kot model za vse republike nekdanje Jugoslavije, ker imajo vsi enako tradicijo pravnega civilnega postopka, pri čemer se lahko na tej točki ugotovi, da imajo podobne socialno-ekonomske razmere. Prav zaradi tega je naloga te teze opozoriti na potrebo o reformi &#1084akedonskega civilnega pravosodnega sistema (tudi civilno-pravosodnih sistemov v nekdanjih jugoslovanskih republikah) glede reševanja masovnih zadev in zlasti potrebe o reformi civilnega postopka. Na podlagi izkušenj drugih držav je treba dati predloge o smernicah, v katerih je treba prilagoditi makedonski pravdni model