[ParlTrack]

Legal basis opinions (0)

Amendments (3)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is ~~worryingly~~ lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; understands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation and welcomes the fact that the Commission favours dialogue over immediate referral to the CJEU;

2023/09/27
Committee: JURI

Gilles LEBRETON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that, in order to reduce the problems related to gold-plating, Parliament, the Council and the Commission should focus on adopting EU legislation drafted using the principles of legal clarity, transparency and legal certainty, with a view to being easily transposable ~~and having a specific European added value; regrets that, all too often, EU law-making resorts to ambiguous compromises between~~; recognises, however, the thfree ~~institutions and loses sight of the ultimate end users (citizens, Member States or businesses); stresses that Union law needs~~dom of each Member State to clearlry ~~establish the rights and obligations of its addressees, particularly the EU institutions and the Member States~~out gold-plating;

2023/09/27
Committee: JURI

Gilles LEBRETON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Is concerned about the use by multinational suppliers of so-called ‘Territorial Supply Constraints’, which are limitations imposed by a supplier that hinder retailers, such as supermarkets, to obtain goods cross-border in a central location and distributing them to other Member States3; warns that, as a consequence, EU consumers are paying more for the same everyday products compared to those in a neighbouring country; _________________ 3 As explained by the Commission: ‘Major branded goods manufacturers may have no direct interest in reducing prices and will try to negotiate contracts at national level to maintain price differences. Retailers in small Member States suggest that when they seek to source supplies from non-domestic wholesalers or even directly from suppliers in more competitive and attractively-priced neighbouring markets, they are redirected to the subsidiary responsible of that particular geographical market or their national wholesalers who have territorial contracts with the suppliers. Such constraints allow segmenting the market and can result in significant wholesale price differences between countries’, Commission Green Paper of 31 January 2013 on unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food and non-food supply chain in Europe (COM(2013)0037).deleted

2023/09/27
Committee: JURI

Activities of Gilles LEBRETON related to 2023/2080(INI)

Legal basis opinions (0)

Amendments (3)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024