The role of

oral

proceedings

CONSENSUAL JUSTICE IN

SOCIAL SECURITY

MATTERS

Petra Hietanen-

Kunwald,

Researcher, HY

OrganizationProfile of the organization

Goal

Strategy

Indicators

Stakeholder engagement Identification of the stakeholders

Engagement

SUSTAINABILITY IN JUDICIAL PROTECTION

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Sustainable dispute resolution

(Judicial) protection in respect of a specific,

individual dispute

Guidance of future dispute resolution

Sustainable?

GOAL

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

External stakeholder perspective vs. internal perspective?

Access to justice is effective.

Stakeholders conceive procedure as just and fair (procedural fairness).

Confidence in the organization and procedure.

SUSTAINABILITY

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Institutional guarantees

Procedural values and principles

Stakeholder engagement

Individual

General

STRATEGY

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Right to participate vs. duty to participate

The complainant an active participant in the

procedure or a case?

PARTICIPATION

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Oral proceedings vs written proceedings in social

security matters

Middle-European models of dispute resolution in

social security matters

WITHIN THE PROCEDURE

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Sozialgericht

Special administrative court

Decision by judgment requires an oral hearing.

Parties may waive their right to an oral hearing.

”Failure to provide an oral hearing infringes in

general the parties’ right to be heard”

GERMANY

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

TASS and TI

Specialized court – civil procedure

Oral hearing obligatory, opting out under specific

circumstances only.

”La procédure est orale.” (CSS , art. R. 142 -20-1)

FRANCE

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Efficient means to implement the parties’ right to be heard.

Open a possibility to instruct (unrepresented) party -> effective access to justice

Promote contact and dialogue between the parties and the court -> fairness

Facilitate alternative forms of dispute resolutions -> flexibility

PURPOSE OF ORAL PROCEEDINGS

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

Termination by

adjudication

Numbers

(2012)

Percentage

(2012)

Decision by judgment 42.216 10,6

Decision by court

decision (without oral

hearing)

24.293 6,1

Other termination

Withdrawal 157.203 39,4

Court settlement 42.133 10,5

Accepted

acknowledgment

60.379 15,1

Mutual declaration that

there is no need to

adjudicate

39.131 9,8

FIGURES (GERMANY)

Petra Hietanen-Kunwald