Public interest actions
A very interesting mechanism, first introduced in 1997 and broadened in 2012, are public interest claims, which can lead to a simplified enforcement of consumer interests. The precondition for apply these instruments is that the infringing conduct of the undertaking affects a wide range of consumers who are not identified individually but are easy to define. In this case, the consumer organisation and some other public organisations are entitled to bring two types of actions, public interest claims and public interest enforcement. A public interest claim can be filed by the NGO at a civil court, if the infringement has not already been ruled on by the Consumer Protection Authority. In this case, the consumer organisation can demand that the trader cease this violation and compensates consumers. If the violation has already been stated by a final decision of the Consumer Protection Authority, a public interest enforcement notice can be issued. In this follow-on suit, the consumer organisation – or the Authority itself – can ask the court to determine the violation and for compensation to the harmed consumers. While both mechanisms could contribute to quick redress to the harmed consumers, the effectiveness of these instruments in practice is unfortunately not very convincing. According to the Hungarian NGOs, the main problem with the first type, public interest claims is that courts very rarely satisfy the compensatory claim itself, and only state the violation. The second, a public interest enforcement action, is rarely used by consumer organisations, because of the necessity of a prior final decision by the Consumer Protection Authority, which can prolong the whole action. A problem often raised concerns proving the involvement of a large number of consumers, especially if the defendant in question does not release information on his clients. Additional issues, which were already mentioned for injunction actions, such as the lack of funds for court cases, and the length of the procedure, are also valid for public interest actions. These shortcomings are similar to the problems of injunction actions.
In summary, it can be noted that public interest claims could be a really effective collective redress mechanism under two conditions: First, if courts would be more willing to satisfy compensatory claims in favour of a wide consumer group, in the same procedure as ruling on the violation (one-shop-stop); second, if the administrative procedure of the Consumer Protection Authority could be quicker, because follow-on court compensation would make sense only in that case.