The expansion of disputes arising from similar conduct by public authorities, business entities, and providers of mass services has posed significant challenges to civil justice systems, including repetitive litigation, procedural delay, and difficulties in the effective enforcement of judgments. In this context, class actions serve as a procedural mechanism capable of structuring the adjudication of collective disputes. However, the principal challenge of this mechanism lies not in the possibility of initiating such claims, but in the absence of a clear procedural model governing their initiation and in the uncertainty surrounding the issuance and enforcement of judgments with collective effects. This article focuses exclusively on the procedural and enforcement dimensions of class actions and deliberately refrains from engaging in substantive or theoretical discussions. The central question is how, within existing legal frameworks, a coherent and operational process may be designed for the filing of collective claims, the management of procedural adjudication, the rendering of judgments, and the enforcement of decisions in a manner that prevents procedural fragmentation and the proliferation of ancillary disputes. Adopting a descriptive–analytical approach, the study draws upon domestic and comparative legal sources and materials relating to collective litigation management. The findings indicate that the effectiveness of class actions depends primarily on the existence of an integrated procedural structure extending from claim initiation to enforcement. The article concludes by proposing procedural and practice-oriented measures, emphasizing the standardization of procedural tools and the development of a unified model for issuing and enforcing judgments in collective litigation.