Conflicts Between Public and Private Enforcers in Class Actions: The Chilean Case
-
Agustin Barroilhet
and
Francisca Barrientos
Abstract
This article studies the conflict between public and private enforcers in Chilean consumer class actions. The paper reviews the history of the class action procedure, the unexpected changes to it introduced by a constitutional challenge, the subsequent increase in private lawsuits, and the ensuing conflict between public and private enforcers. Coordinating class actions’ enforcement is inherently challenging due to their differing funding and varying willingness to settle. As the Chilean case shows, there is no comprehensive catch-all solution to this problem. However, these difficult statutory choices should not hinder consumers’ redress. Hence, the article suggests that Chilean judges should proactively use existing legal provisions regarding the ‘common counsel’ to facilitate settlements, thus avoiding protracted court cases that can last more than a decade.
Funding source: Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo CientÃ-fico y Tecnológico
Award Identifier / Grant number: 11230841
Award Identifier / Grant number: 1230883
Acknowledgements
Agustín Barroilhet is the principal researcher of Fondecyt of Initiation (ANID) Nº 11230841 “The Private Enforcement of Statutes in Chile”. Francisca Barrientos is the principal researcher of Fondecyt (ANID) Nº 1230883 “El desajuste de la morosidad del consumidor y las instituciones que giran en torno a ella. Por su reordenación a partir del préstamo responsable y su vinculación con los otros principios regulados en materia de cobranza extrajudicial.” The authors want to thank the Seminar Hojas Juzgadas from University of Chile, the panel on public enforcement on ICON-S 2025, and participants at the workshop in Florida International University, Aug. 2025.
References
Aguirrezábal Grünstein, Maite. 2018. “Critical Analysis of the Voluntary Procedure Introduced in the Chilean Consumer Protection Law as an Alternative Mechanism of Resolution Collective Disputes.” Revista de Derecho (Universidad Católica Dámaso A. Larrañaga, Facultad de Derecho): 45–71.10.22235/rd.v18i2.1613Search in Google Scholar
Aguirrezábal Grünstein, Maite. 2019. Defensa de los Consumidores y Acceso a la Justicia. Monografías Santiago Chile: Thompson Reuters.Search in Google Scholar
Barnes, Jeb. 2007. “Bringing the Courts Back In: Interbranch Perspectives on the Role of Courts in American Politics and Policy Making.” Annual Review of Political Science 10: 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.080505.101210.Search in Google Scholar
Barrientos, Francisca, Rossana y Cañete, and Agustín Barroilhet. 2025. “Tres casos de antinomias del consumo financiero. Propuesta de solución a la luz del diálogo de fuentes.” Revista chilena de derecho y ciencia política 16: 1–29.10.7770/rchdcp-v16n1-art425Search in Google Scholar
Barrientos, Francisca, Claudio, Fuentes, and Juan Eduardo, Vargasw. 2018. “Mediaciones Individuales’ y ‘Mediaciones Colectivas’ Que Realiza El Sernac.” In Mecanismos Alternativos de Solución de Conflictos, Estado actual, problemas existentes y propuesta de soluciones. Santiago Chile: Thompson Reuters.Search in Google Scholar
Barrientos, Francisca, and Lucas Del, Villar Montt, eds. 2021. Interés General, Las Negociaciones Extrajudiciales y Juicios Colectivos En El Derecho Dle Consumo. Santiago Chile: Thompson Reuters.Search in Google Scholar
Barrientos, Francisca, and Ana Sofía Pérez-Toril. 2021. “Análisis cuantitativo de las mediaciones colectivas entre 2015–2019.” en Francisca Barrientos y Lucas del Villar (dres.), Ignacio Labra (cood.) Ana Sofía Pérez-Toril (edit.) Interés general, las negociaciones extrajudiciales y juicios colectivos en el derecho del consumo, 281–303. Santiago: Thomson Reuters.Search in Google Scholar
Barroilhet, Agustín. 2012. “Class Actions in Chile.” Law and Business Review of the Americas 18: 275–327.10.2139/ssrn.1995906Search in Google Scholar
Barroilhet, Agustín. 2015. “Class Actions in Chile: Update.” Global Class Actions Exchange. Stanford, USA: Stanford University. https://globalclassactions.law.stanford.edu/class-actions-in-chile-update/.10.2139/ssrn.2992347Search in Google Scholar
Barroilhet, Agustín. 2016. “Self-Interested Gatekeeping? Clashes Between Public and Private Enforcers in Two Chilean Class Actions.” In Class Actions in Context, edited by Deborah Hensler, Chistopher Hodges, and Ianika Tzankova. London: Edward Elgar Publishing.10.4337/9781783470440.00027Search in Google Scholar
Barroilhet, Agustín. 2018a. “The Regime Politics Origins of Class Action Regulation.” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 19: 363–94. https://doi.org/10.1515/til-2018-0012.Search in Google Scholar
Barroilhet, Agustín. 2018b. “Sernac y Tribunal Constitucional,” La Tercera, June22, Letters.Search in Google Scholar
Barros Bourie, Enrique. 2006. Tratado de responsabilidad extracontractual. Santiago: Editorial Juridica de Chile.Search in Google Scholar
Beisner, John H., Matthew, Shors, and Jessica Davison, Miller. 2004. “Class Action Cops: Public Servants or Private Entrepreneurs.” Stanford Law Review 57: 1441.Search in Google Scholar
Bornstein, Stephanie. 2019. “Public-Private Co-Enforcement Litigation.” Minnesota Law Review 104: 811–88.Search in Google Scholar
Boyer, Barry, and Errol Meidinger. 1985. “Privatizing Regulatory Enforcement: A Preliminary Assessment of Citizen Suits Under Federal Environmental Laws.” Buffalo Law Review 34: 833.Search in Google Scholar
Burbank, Stephen B., Sean, Farhang, and Herbert, M. Kritzer. 2013. “Private Enforcement.” Lewis & Clark Law Review 17: 637.Search in Google Scholar
Burbank, Stephen B., and Sean Farhang. 2014. “Litigation Reform: An Institutional Approach.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 162: 1543.Search in Google Scholar
Burke, Thomas F. 2000. “Rights Revolution Continues: Why New Rights Are Born (and Old Rights Rarely Die), The.” Connecticut Law Review 33: 1259.10.2139/ssrn.2556451Search in Google Scholar
Burke, Thomas F. 2002. Lawyers, Lawsuits, and Legal Rights: The Battle over Litigation in American Society. California Series in Law, Politics, and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cafaggi, Fabrizio, and Hans-W. Micklitz. 2007. “Administrative and Judicial Collective Enforcement of Consumer Law in the US and the European Community,” SSRN eLibrary.10.2139/ssrn.1024103Search in Google Scholar
Clopton, Zachary D. 2016. “Redundant Public-Private Enforcement.” Vanderbilt Law Review 69: 285.Search in Google Scholar
Coffee Jr, John C. 1983. “Rescuing the Private Attorney General: Why the Model of the Lawyer as Bounty Hunter Is Not Working.” Maryland Law Review 42: 215.Search in Google Scholar
Coffee, John C. Jr 1986. “Understanding the Plaintiff’s Attorney: The Implications of Economic Theory for Private Enforcement of Law through Class and Derivative Actions.” Columbia Law Review 86: 669.10.2307/1122577Search in Google Scholar
Coffee Jr, John C. 2000. “Class Action Accountability: Reconciling Exit, Voice, and Loyalty in Representative Litigation.” Columbia Law Review 100: 370. https://doi.org/10.2307/1123472.Search in Google Scholar
Contardo, Juan Ignacio. 2021. “Naturaleza jurídica del acuerdo del procedimiento voluntario y su importancia para la extensión de sus efectos.” en Juan Ignacio Contardo e Iñigo De la Maza (dirs.). Estudios de derecho del consumidor II, VIII Jornadas de Derecho del Consumo. Santiago: Rubicón.Search in Google Scholar
Dávila Avendaño, Mireya. 2011. “Governing Together: The Concertación Administrations in Chile (1990–2009) – ProQuest.” Doctoral Dissertation. North Carolina, USA: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Del Villar Montt, Lucas. 2023. Generando confianza en la institucionalidad de protección al consumidor en Chile: Evolución y desafíos pendientes. Diálogos CECO Santiago: Centro Competencia CECO-UAI.Search in Google Scholar
Engel, Eduardo, Ernesto, Muñoz, and Andrea, Repetto. 2013. Hacia Una Sociedad Sin Abusos: Propuestas Para Una Protección Eficaz de Los Consumidores. Políticas Públicas Espacio Público.Search in Google Scholar
Engstrom, David Freeman. 2013. “Agencies as Litigation Gatekeepers.” The Yale Law Journal 123: 616.Search in Google Scholar
Engstrom, David Freeman. 2014. “Private Enforcement’s Pathways: Lessons from Qui Tam Litigation.” Columbia Law Review 114: 1913.Search in Google Scholar
Farhang, Sean. 2009. “Congressional Mobilization of Private Litigants: Evidence from the Civil Rights Act of 1991.” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 6: 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01136.x.Search in Google Scholar
Farhang, Sean. 2010. The Litigation State: Public Regulation and Private Lawsuits in the United States. Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400836789Search in Google Scholar
Farhang, Sean, and Miranda Yaver. 2016. “Divided Government and the Fragmentation of American Law.” American Journal of Political Science 60: 401–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12188.Search in Google Scholar
Ferrante, Alfredo. 2022. Ley Sobre Protección de Los Derechos de Los Consumidores. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.Search in Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Brian T. 2019. The Conservative Case for Class Actions. University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226659473.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Foster, Chase. 2023. “Legalism without Adversarialism? Bureaucratic Legalism and the Politics of Regulatory Implementation in the European Union.” Regulation & Governance 17: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12524.Search in Google Scholar
Fuentes, Fernando, and Eduardo, Saavedra. 2016. “Marco institucional y facultades sancionatorias del Servicio Nacional del Consumidor en Chile.” Economía y Política 3: 5–39. https://doi.org/10.15691/07194714.2016.001.Search in Google Scholar
Gomez, Manuel A. 2011. “Will the Birds Stay South – The Rise of Class Actions and Other Forms of Group Litigation Across Latin America.” University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 43: 481–522.10.2139/ssrn.1930413Search in Google Scholar
Guerrero Becar, José Luis. 2020. “Funciones y atribuciones del Servicio Nacional del Consumidor: Avanzando hacia el origen.” Revista Justicia & Derecho 3: 1–21.10.32457/rjyd.v3i1.455Search in Google Scholar
Haar, Brigitte. 2018. “Regulation Through Litigation – Collective Redress in Need of a New Balance Between Individual Rights and Regulatory Objectives in Europe.” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 19: 203–33. https://doi.org/10.1515/til-2018-0007.Search in Google Scholar
Hensler, Deborah R., Nicholas, Pace, Bonita, Doomble-More, Beth, Giddens, Jennifer, Gross, and Erick, K. Moller. 2000. Class Action Dilemmas: Pursuing Public Goals for Private Gain. Santa Monica: Rand Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Issacharoff, Samuel. 2012. “Class Actions and State Authority.” Loyola University Chicago Law Journal 44: 369.Search in Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. 2003. Adversarial Legalism. Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kessler, Daniel P., ed. 2011. Regulation Versus Litigation: Perspectives from Economics and Law. A National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. 2009. “Martin Shapiro: Anticipating the New Institutionalism.” In The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior. University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lemos, Margaret H. 2010. “Special Incentives to Sue.” Minnesota Law Review 95: 782.10.2139/ssrn.1474923Search in Google Scholar
Lemos, Margaret H. 2012. “Aggregate Litigation Goes Public: Representative Suits by State Attorneys General.” Harvard Law Review 126: 486–549.Search in Google Scholar
Lemos, Margaret H. 2015. “Privatizing Public Litigation.” The Georgetown Law Journal 104: 515–82.Search in Google Scholar
Litvinoff, Saul. 1977. “Moral Damages.” Louisiana Law Review 38: 2.Search in Google Scholar
Lopez Rodriguez, Ana Mercedes. 2024. “Class Action in the EU: Lessons from Mixed Jurisdictions.” Journal of Comparative and International Law 11 (2): 277–306.10.2139/ssrn.4990976Search in Google Scholar
Maveety, Nancy L. 2009. “The Historical-Institutionalist Pioneers.” In The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior. University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar
Melnick, Shep. 2005. “One Government Agency Among Many: The Political Juris-Prudence (Sic) of Martin Shapiro.” In Institutions & Public Law: Comparative Approaches. Teaching Texts in Law and Politics New York, edited by T. Ginsburg, and R. A. Kagan. P. Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Miller, Geoffrey P. 1987. “Some Agency Problems in Settlement.” The Journal of Legal Studies 16: 189–215. https://doi.org/10.1086/467828.Search in Google Scholar
Moe, Terry M. 1990. “Political Institutions: The Neglected Side of the Story.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6: 213–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/6.special_issue.213.Search in Google Scholar
Pardow Lorenzo, Diego. 2015. “El Servicio Nacional del Consumidor de Chile (Sernac) y los reguladores sectoriales: Buscando mecanismos para una mejor coordinación.” Economía y Política 2: 107–36. https://doi.org/10.15691/07194714.2015.008.Search in Google Scholar
Ponce, Matías, and Bernardo, Aylwin. 2023. “Aspectos generales de las acciones colectivas de la Ley N° 19.496: Desde la compensación a la regulación.” Revista de Derecho (Valdivia) XXXVI (2): 29–50.10.4067/s0718-09502023000200029Search in Google Scholar
Reveco Soto, Eduardo. 2023. “El Examen de Admisibilidad de Las Acciones Colectivas. Un Tránsito Normativo Radical Desde El Rigor a La Simplicidad.” In Estudios de Derecho Del Consumidor IV: X Jornadas Nacionales de Derecho Del Consumo Facultad de Derecho. Universidad Andrés Bello, edited by N. Walker Silva, and C. Schiele Manzor. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.Search in Google Scholar
Roa, José. 2011. Servicio Nacional Del Consumidor Gestión 2005 -2010 y Perspectivas de Futuro. Chile: SERNAC. https://www.sernac.cl/portal/617/articles-52902_recurso_9.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Rubenstein, William B. 2005. “Why Enable Litigation: A Positive Externalities Theory of the Small Claims Class Action.” UMKC Law Review 74: 709–28.Search in Google Scholar
SERNAC. 2021. “Aprueba circular interpretativa sobre deberes legales y buenas prácticas para las partes litigantes durante la tramitación de procedimientos para defensa del interés colectivo y difuso de los consumidores” [Aproves the interpretative decree about legal duties and best practices for litigants during the procedings for the defense of the colective and difuse interest of consumers] Res. Ex. Nº 71, February 5th, 2021 Servicio Nacional del Consumidor.Search in Google Scholar
Soto Delgado, Pablo. 2021. “El Tribunal Constitucional Del Prójimo: El Caso Sernac y Sus Lecciones Para El Proceso Constituyente.” In El Tribunal Constitucional Frente al Proceso Constituyente. Ensayos Críticos Sobre Su Jurisprudencia y Sus Prácticas, edited by V. Ponce de León, and P. Soto Delgado. Thompson Reuters.Search in Google Scholar
Stephenson, Matthew C. 2006. “Legislative Allocation of Delegated Power: Uncertainty, Risk, and the Choice Between Agencies and Courts.” Harvard Law Review 119: 1035.10.2139/ssrn.716863Search in Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 1992. “What’s Standing After Lujan – Of Citizen Suits, Injuries, and Article III.” Michigan Law Review 91: 163. https://doi.org/10.2307/1289685.Search in Google Scholar
Vargas, Juan Enrique. 2019. “El rol de las Asociaciones de Consumidores en la litigación de los casos de consumo en Chile, Juan Ignacio Contardo, Felipe Fernández y Claudio Fuentes (cood.) Litigación en materia de consumidores. Dogmática y práctica en la reforma de fortalecimiento al SERNAC. Santiago: Thomson Reuters, 353–370.Search in Google Scholar
Velasco Caballero, Francisco. 2014. Derecho Público Más Derecho Privado. Barcelona: Marcial Pons.Search in Google Scholar
Viscusi, W. Kip. 2002. Regulation Through Litigation. AEI Press.Search in Google Scholar
Voet, Stefaan. 2017. “Where the Wild Things Are’. Reflections on the State and Future of European Collective Redress.” In Waves in Contract and Liability Law in Three Decades of Ius Commune. Rochester: Cambridge, Intersentia.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, Franziska, and Michael Faure. 2015. “The Interplay Between Public and Private Enforcement in European Private Law: Law and Economics Perspective.” European Review of Private Law 23: 525–49. https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2015036.Search in Google Scholar
Statutes and Bills Cited
Chile, Mensaje del Presidente de la República (2001), Mensaje del Presidente de la República con el que se inicia un proyecto de ley que modifica la ley nº 19.496, sobre protección de los derechos de los consumidores de 8 de Septiembre de 2001 a Sesión 35 de la Legislatura 344.Search in Google Scholar
Chile, Boletin 6543-04, Senado de la República, Modifica ley N° 19.496, sobre Protección de los Derechos de los Consumidores, available at http://www.senado.cl/appsenado/templates/tramitacion/index.php?boletin_ini=6543-03.Search in Google Scholar
Chile, Law No. 19.496, Establishes rules on Consumer Rights Protection. [CPA].Search in Google Scholar
Chile, Law No. 20.443, Amends Art. 19 of DFL No. 458 of 1976 and Art. 18 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure.Search in Google Scholar
Chile, Exempt Resolution No. 71, Sernac 2021, Approves interpretative circular on legal duties and good practices for litigants during the processing of proceedings for the defense of the collective and diffuse interest of consumers.Search in Google Scholar
United States , Rule 23(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, available at https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_23.Search in Google Scholar
Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC.Search in Google Scholar
Court Cases Cited
Asociación de Consumidores y Usuarios de Chile v. LATAM Airlines Group S.A. (2020): 25th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-8903-2020 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
Conadecus with Banco Estado (2004): 14th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-11679- 2004 (Class Action).Search in Google Scholar
Conadecus A.C. and another against Agrosuper S.A. and others (2019): Tribunal de Defensa de la Libre Competencia, Rol CIP-2-2019 (Class Action).Search in Google Scholar
Conadecus con Santander Consumer Financer (2023): Corte de Apelaciones de Santiago, Rol C-855-2023, en trámite (Class Action).Search in Google Scholar
Conadecus con CMPC Tissue y otro (2021): 10° Juzgado Civil de Santiago, Rol C-29214-2015 (Class Action).Search in Google Scholar
ODECU Organización de Consumidores de Chile v. Bankboston N.A. , 30th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-19914-2006 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
ODECU Organización de Consumidores de Chile v. Banco Santander S.A. , 24th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-19887-2006 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
ODECU Organización de Consumidores de Chile v. Santander Seguros de Vida Chile S.A (2019): 12th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-23539-2019 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
Prats con Scotiabank Chile (2016): 16° Juzgado Civil de Santiago, Rol C-22148-2016, en trámite. (Class action)).Search in Google Scholar
National Consumer Service with Banco de Chile (2022): 19th Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-833-2022 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
Servicio Nacional del Consumidor with Farmacias Cruz Verde and others (2013): 10th Civil Court of Santiago Case No. C-1940-2013 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
Servicio Nacional del Consumidor with Inversiones C.S.G.S.A. (2011): 1st Civil Court of Santiago, Rol C-12105-2011 (Class action).Search in Google Scholar
Constitutional Court , Case No. 4012-2017.Search in Google Scholar
Constitutional Court , Case No. 4727-2018.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
