The organization of remedies. The main discussion of this book took place over three chapters. Chapter 2 discussed the so-called ‘hierarchy’ of remedies that is prescribed by consumer sales law in the US and the EU. Then, in Chapter 3 the (in)ability to invoke remedies extrajudicially was assessed. Finally, in Chapter 4, the role of notification duties was examined. When carrying out this analysis, the main question was: what is the best possible organization of remedies to protect consumers?

Current state of affairs. With regard to the hierarchy of remedies (damages, specific performance, and termination), the US system basically favors damages over specific performance, while the European system mostly sticks with the promised contract, 711 favoring specific performance. At first sight, the starting points for the two systems are very different. Nevertheless, the exceptions to these basic rules in both systems are sometimes so important that it cannot be denied that both systems are converging. When comparing the termination remedy (also called cancellation or rescission) in the different legal systems, it has to be concluded that oft en a certain degree of ‘seriousness’ of the breach is required, both in the EU and the US.

With regard to the extrajudicial application of the remedies, it has been seen that under almost all of the EU instruments examined in this book, the termination remedy can be applied extrajudicially (except for termination under the current Consumer Sales Directive in some EU countries). Similarly, in the US system, termination can be invoked extrajudicially. Concerning specific performance, the EU instruments do not explicitly provide or prescribe an extrajudicial application for this remedy (repair or replacement). However, in the opinion of the present author, those instruments allow the consumer to unilaterally invoke specific performance. In contrast, in the US system specific performance is certainly not considered a self-help right. As consumer, one has to go to a judge to enforce it. Finally, the damages remedy is typically, under both systems, applied judicially (and not extrajudicially) because of the necessary assessment of the amount of damages by a judge.