| Abstract | Od samih početaka stvaranja Europske unije, potrošača se gledalo kao glavnu pokretačku snagu unutarnjeg tržišta. Međutim, po svojoj prirodi potrošač je gotovo pa uvijek u nepovoljnijem položaju u odnosu na trgovca zbog čega je bilo potrebno zaštititi donošenjem raznih materijalnih i procesnih akata. U međuvremenu su se javili problemi preopterećenosti sudbene vlasti dovela je spore, skupe i neefikasne zaštite, ne samo potrošača već i općenito stranka u drugim vrstama postupaka. Radilo se o problemu s kojim se nisu suočavale samo države članice EU, već i ostatak svijeta. Pokušavši doskočiti tim problemima, u teoriji i praksi su se počeli razvijati alternativni, izvansudski, načini rješavanja sporova, a jedna od najpoznatijih i najkorištenijih metoda bila je mirenje. Mirenjem se pokušalo dati strankama dodatnu mogućnost da riješe svoje sporove na fleksibilniji, brži i jeftiniji način. Daljnjim razvojem zaštite potrošačkih prava EU je olakšati potrošačima rješavanje sporova s trgovcima potičući korištenje takvih alternativnih metoda što je rezultiralo donošenjem Direktive 2013/11/EU-a o alternativnom rješavanju potrošačkih sporova. Hrvatska kao država članica EU je implementirala direktivu u svoje zakonodavstvo donoseći ZARPS te su akreditirana tijela za provođenje postupaka za alternativno rješavanje potrošačkih sporova. Iako ideja nije bila korištenje mirenja kao glavne metode tih postupaka, već kombinacija različitih metoda, u Hrvatskoj se ipak zadržalo na korištenju mirenja za rješenje potrošačkih sporova. |
| Abstract (english) | Since the beginning of European Union, consumer was considered as the main actor on internal market. However, by its very nature, the consumer is almost always in a disadvantageous position compared to the trader, which is why it was necessary to protect it by adopting various material and procedural acts. In the meantime, the problems of the overloading of the judicial branch appeared, which led to slow, expensive and ineffective protection, not only of the consumer, but also of the party in other types of proceedings not only in consumer disputes. It was a problem faced not only by the EU member states, but also by the rest of the world. Trying to get to grips with these problems, alternative, out-of-court dispute resolution methods began to develop in theory and practice, and one of the most well-known and used methods was mediation. Mediation was an attempt to give the parties an additional opportunity to resolve their disputes in a more flexible, faster, and cheaper way. The further development of EU consumer rights protection was to make it easier for consumers to resolve disputes with traders by encouraging the use of such alternative methods, which resulted in the adoption of Directive 2013/11/EU on alternative resolution of consumer disputes. Croatia, as an EU member state, has implemented the directive in its legislation by passing the ZARPS and accredited bodies for the implementation of procedures for the alternative resolution of consumer disputes. Although the idea was not to use mediation as the main method of these procedures, but rather a combination of different methods, mediation is still mostly used for the resolution of consumer disputes. |
