65 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2016/0190(CNS)
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/200334 has been substantially amended35. Since further indispensable amendments are to be made, that Regulation should be recast in the interests of clarity. The reform of the Regulation will help to strengthen legal certainty, increase flexibility, ensuring access to court and efficient proceedings, whilst Member States retain full sovereignty with regard to the substantive laws on parental responsibility. __________________ 34 Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1). 35 See Annex V.
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) This Regulation establishes uniform jurisdiction rules for divorce, separation and the annulment of marriage as well as rules for disputes about parental responsibility with an international element. It facilitates the free circulation of decisions in the Union, and of any other equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State, by laying down provisions on their recognition and enforcement in other Member States.
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The smooth and correct functioning of a Union area of justice and fundamental rights with respect for the Member States' different legal systems and traditions is vital for the Union. In that regard, mutual trust in one another's justice systems should be further enhanced. The Union has set itself the objective of creating, maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice, in which the free movement of persons, respect for fundamental rights and access to justice are ensured.. With a view to implementing those objectives, the rights of persons, notably children, in legal proceedings should be reinforced in order to facilitate the cooperation of judicial and administrative authorities and the enforcement of decisionsother authorities in the Member States with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation and the enforcement of decisions or any equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State in family law matters with cross-border implications. The mutual recognition of decisions in civil matters should be enhanced, access to justice should be simplified and exchanges of information between the authorities of the Member States should be improved upon.
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to attain the objective of free circulation of decisions or any equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, it is necessary and appropriate that the rules governing jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of decisions be governed by a legal instrument of the Union which is binding and directly applicable.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) As regards decisions or any equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State on divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment, this Regulation should apply only to the dissolution of matrimonial ties and should not deal with issues such as the grounds for divorce, property consequences of the marriage or any other ancillary measures.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) This Regulation leaves it to the discretion of the Member States to define marriage.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) This Regulation leaves it to the discretion of the Member States to define marriages between persons of the same sex.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) This Regulation should not prevent the authorities of a Member State not having jurisdiction over the substance of the matter from taking provisional, including protective measures, in urgent cases, with regard to the person or property of a child present in that Member State. Those measures should be recognised and enforced in all other Member States including the Member States having jurisdiction under this Regulation until a competent authority of such a Member State has taken the measures it considers appropriate. Measures taken by a court in one Member State should however only be amended or replaced by measures also taken by a court in the Member State having jurisdiction over the substance of the matter. An authority only having jurisdiction for provisional, including protective measures should, if seised with an application concerning the substance of the matter, declare of its own motion that it has no jurisdiction. Insofar as the protection of the best interests of the child so requires, the authority should inform, directly or through the Central Authority and without undue delay, the authority of the Member State having jurisdiction over the substance of the matter under this Regulation about the measures taken. The failure to inform the authority of another Member State should however not as such be a ground for the non-recognition of the measure.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Proceedings in matters of parental responsibility under this Regulation as well as return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention should respect the child’s right to express his or her views freely, and when assessing the child’s best interests, due weight should be given to those views, taking account of the child’s age and maturity. The hearing of the child in accordance with Article 24(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child plays an important role in the application of this Regulation. This Regulation is however not intended to set out howcommon minimum standards for the Member States regarding the procedures to hear the child, for instance, whether the child ishould be heard by the judge in person or by a specially trained expert reporting to the court afterwards, or whether the child ishould be heard in the courtroom or in another place, which is governed by the procedural rules laid down by each Member State’s national legislation.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In order to conclude the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention as quickly as possible, Member States should concentrate jurisdiction for those proceedings upon one or morea limited number of courts, taking into account their internal structures for the administration of justice as appropriate. The concentration of jurisdiction upon a limited number of courts within a Member State is an essential and effective tool for simplifying and speeding up the handling of child abduction cases in several Member States because the judges hearing a larger number of these cases develop particular expertise. Depending on the structure of the legal system, jurisdiction for child abduction cases could be concentrated in one single court for the whole country or in a limited number of courts, using, for example, the number of appellate courts as point of departure and concentrating jurisdiction for international child abduction cases upon one court of first instance within each district of a court of appeal, without prejudice to parties' right of access to justice or the timeliness of the return proceedings. Every instance should give its decision no later than six weeks after the application or appeal has been lodged with it. Member States should limit the number of appeals possible against a decision granting or refusing the return of a child under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention to one.
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In all cases concerning children, and in particular in cases of international child abduction, judicial and administrative authorities, as well as other authorities in the Member States with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation, should consider the possibility of achieving amicable solutions through mediation and other appropriate means, assisted, where appropriate, by existing networks and support structures for mediation in cross-border parental responsibility disputes. Such efforts should not, however, unduly prolong the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The recognition of a decision or equivalent ruling issued by an authority of a Member State should be refused only if one or more of the grounds for refusal of recognition provided for in Articles 37 and 38 are present. The grounds mentioned in points (a) to (c) of Article 38(1), however, may not be invoked against decisions or equivalent rulings on rights of access and the decisions on return pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 26(4) which have been certified in the Member State of origin in accordance with this Regulation, as this was already the case under Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003.
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) In addition, the aim of making cross-border litigation concerning children efficient, less time consuming and less costly justifies the abolition of the declaration of enforceability prior to enforcement in the Member State of enforcement for all decisions or equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State on parental responsibility matters. While Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 only abolished this requirement for decisions or equivalent rulings granting access and certain decisions ordering the return of a child, this Regulation now provides for a single procedure for the cross-border enforcement of all decisions or, as appropriate, equivalent rulings issued by an authority of a Member State in matters of parental responsibility. As a result, subject to the provisions of this Regulation, a decision or equivalent ruling given by the authorities of a Member State should be treated as if it had been given in the Member State of enforcement.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Authentic instruments and agreements between parties that are enforceable in one Member State should be treated as equivalent to '‘decisions'’ and ‘equivalent rulings’ for the purpose of the application of the rules on recognition and enforcement.
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The direct enforcement in a Member State of a decision givenor equivalent ruling given or issued in another Member State without a declaration of enforceability should not jeopardise the respect for the rights of the defence. Therefore, the person against whom enforcement is sought should be able to apply for refusal of the recognition or enforcement of a decision or equivalent ruling if he or she considers one of the grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement of this Regulation to be present.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) A party challenging the enforcement of a decision givenor equivalent ruling given or issued in another Member State should, to the extent possible and in accordance with the legal system of the Member State of enforcement, be able to invoke, in the same procedure, in addition to the grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement as set out in Articles 37 and 38 of this Regulation, the grounds for refusal of enforcement as such as set out in Article 40(2) of this Regulation. The incompatibility of the enforcement of a decision or equivalent ruling with the best interests of the child which has been caused by the strength of the objections of a child of sufficient age and maturity or by another change of circumstances which occurred after the decision was givenor equivalent ruling was given or issued, should only be considered if it reaches an importance comparable to the public policy exception. Grounds for refusal of enforcement available under national law may not be invoked. Where the refusal of enforcement is based on the objections of a child of sufficient age and maturity, the competent authorities in the Member State of enforcement should however take all appropriate steps to prepare the child for enforcement and obtain his or her cooperation before refusing enforcement.
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) In order to inform the person against whom enforcement is sought of the enforcement of a decision givenor equivalent ruling given or issued in another Member State, the certificate established under this Regulation should be served on that person in reasonable timewithout undue delay before the first enforcement measure and if necessary, accompanied by the decision or equivalent ruling. In that context, the first enforcement measure should mean the first enforcement measure after such service.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The certificate issued to facilitate enforcement of the decision or equivalent ruling issued by an authority of a Member State should not be subject to appeal. It should be rectified only where there is a material error, namely where it does not correctly reflect the decision . It should be withdrawn where it was clearly wrongly granted, having regard to the requirements laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Without prejudice to any requirements under its national procedural law, a requesting authority should have the discretion to choose freely between the different channels available to it for obtaining the necessary information, for example, in case of courts by applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001, by using the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters, in particular the Central Authorities established under this Regulation, Network judges and contact points, or in case of judicial and administrative authorities and in case of other authorities in the Member States with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation, by requesting information through a specialised non- governmental organisation in this field.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Where a request with supporting reasons for a report on the situation of the child, on any ongoing procedures or on decisions takenor equivalent rulings taken or issued concerning the child is made, the competent authorities of the requested Member State should carry out such a request without applying any further requirements which may exist under their national law. The request should contain in particular a description of the proceedings for which the information is needed and the factual situation that gave rise to those proceedings.
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) An authority of a Member State contemplating a decision or equivalent ruling on parental responsibility should be entitled to request the communication of information relevant to the protection of the child from the authorities of another Member State if the best interests of the child so require. Depending on the circumstances, this may include information on proceedings and decisions concerning a parent or siblings of the child, or on the capacity of a parent to care for a child or to have access to the child.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) Where an authority of a Member State has already given a decisionor issued a decision or equivalent ruling in matters of parental responsibility or is contemplating such a decision or equivalent ruling and the implementation is to take place in another Member State, the authority may request that the authorities of that other Member State assist in the implementation of the decision. This should apply, for instance, to decisions or equivalent rulings granting supervised access to be exercised in a Member State other than the Member State where the authority ordering access is located or involving any other accompanying measures of the competent authorities in the Member State where the decision or equivalent ruling is to be implemented.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Where an authority of a Member State considers the placement of a child with family members or in a foster family or in an institution in another Member State, a consultation procedure through the Central Authorities of both Member States concerned should be carried out prior to the placement. The authority considering the placement should obtain the consent of the competent authority of the Member State in which the child should be placed before ordering the placement. As the placements are most often urgent measures required to remove a child from a situation which puts his or her best interests at risk, time is of the essence for such decisions. In order to speed up the consultation procedure, this Regulation therefore exhaustively establishes the requirements for the request and a time limit for the response from the Member State where the child should be placed. The conditions for granting or refusing consent, however, continue to be governed by the national law of the requested Member State.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation applies, whatever the nature of the judicial or administrative authority or other authority with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation, in civil matters relating to:
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the placement of the child with family members, in a foster family or in secure institutional care;
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. 'authority' means any judicial or administrative authority, and any other authority in the Member States with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation ;
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
4. 'decision' means a decree, order or, judgment or any equivalent ruling of an authority of a Member State concerning divorce, legal separation, marriage annulment or parental responsibility;
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The authorities of a Member State shall have jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility over a child who is habitually resident in that Member State . Where a child moves lawfully from one Member State to another and acquires a new habitual residence there, the authorities of the Member State of the new habitual residence shall have jurisdiction, unless proceedings are already pending in the Member State in which the child previously resided.
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) If proceedings are pending in the Member State in which the child previously resided, the competent authority that was initially seised shall seise the competent authority of the Member State to which the child has lawfully moved, with a view to declining jurisdiction.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where a child moves lawfully from one Member State to another and acquires a new habitual residence there, the authorities of the Member State of the child's former habitual residence shall retain jurisdiction , for three months following the move, to modify a decision or equivalent ruling on access rights given or issued in that Member State before the child moved if the person granted access rights by the decision or equivalent ruling continues to have his or her habitual residence in the Member State of the child's former habitual residence.
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b – point v
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b – point v
(v) a decision or equivalent ruling on custody that does not entail the return of the child has been given or issued by the authorities of the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
In so far as the protection of the best interests of the child so requires, the authority having taken the protective measures shall inform the authority of the Member State having jurisdiction under this Regulation, as well as other competent authorities in this matter, as to the substance of the matter, either directly or through the Central Authority designated pursuant to Article 60.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The measures taken pursuant to paragraph 1 shall cease to apply as soon as the authority of the Member State having jurisdiction under this Regulation as to the substance of the matter has taken the measures it considers appropriate and accordingly notified the Member State in which the precautionary measures have been taken.
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
When exercising their jurisdiction under Section 2 of this Chapter, the authorities of the Member States shall ensure that a child who is capable of forming his or her own views is given the genuine and effective opportunityright to express those views freely during the proceedings regarding any problem affecting him or her under Articles 12 and 13 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
The authority shall give due weight to the child's views in accordance with his or her age and maturity and document its considerations in the decision. , taking account of the child’s best interests, and document in detail its observations in the considerations of the decision or equivalent ruling. For this purpose, the child shall be given, in particular, the opportunity to be heard in the course of any judicial or administrative proceedings concerning him or her or before any Member State authorities with jurisdiction in matters falling within the scope of this Regulation, either directly or through a representative or appropriate body, in accordance with the procedural rules laid down by national law.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. A decision given in a Member State or equivalent ruling delivered by a Member State authority with jurisdiction in the field covered by this Regulation shall be recognised in the other Member States without any procedure being required.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. In particular, and without prejudice to paragraph 3, no procedure shall be required for updating the civil-status records of a Member State on the basis of a decision or equivalent ruling relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment given in another Member State, and against which no further appeal lies under the law of that Member State.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A party who wishes to invoke in a Member State a decision given in another Member State or an equivalent ruling delivered by the relevant authority of another Member State shall submit the following:
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a copy of the decision or equivalent ruling which satisfies the conditions necessary to establish its authenticity; and
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The authority before which a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in another Member State is invoked may, where necessary, require the party invoking it to provide, in accordance with Article 69, a translation or a transliteration of the relevant content of the certificate referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1.
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The authority may require the party to provide a translation of the decision or equivalent ruling instead of a translation of the relevant content of the certificate only if it is unable to proceed without such a translation.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The authority before which a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in another Member State is invoked may stay the proceedings , in whole or in part, in the following cases:
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the decision or equivalent ruling is challenged in the Member State of origin;
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) in case of a decision or equivalent ruling on parental responsibility, proceedings to modify the decision or for a new decisionequivalent ruling or for a new decision or equivalent ruling on the same subject matter are pending in the Member State having jurisdiction over the substance of the matter under this Regulation.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. A decision or equivalent ruling on matters of parental responsibility in respect of a child given in a Member State which is enforceable in that Member State shall be enforceable in the other Member States without any declaration of enforceability being required.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. The procedure for the enforcement of decisions given or equivalent rulings delivered in another Member State shall, in so far as it is not covered by this Regulation, be governed by the law of the Member State of enforcement. Without prejudice to Article 40, a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in a Member State which is enforceable in the Member State of enforcement shall be enforced there under the same conditions as a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in the Member State of enforcement.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The party seeking the enforcement of a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in another Member State shall not be required to have a postal address in the Member State of enforcement.
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A party who applies for enforcement in a Member State of a decision given or equivalent ruling delivered in another Member State shall submit the following:
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a copy of the decision or equivalent ruling which satisfies the conditions necessary to establish its authenticity; and
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. The court may require the applicant to provide a translation of the decision or equivalent ruling only if it is unable to proceed without such a translation.
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
On the application of any interested party, the recognition of a decision or equivalent ruling relating to a divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment shall be refused :
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. On the application of any interested party, the recognition of a decision or equivalent ruling relating to parental responsibility shall be refused :
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) on the request of any person claiming that the decisioncontested decision or equivalent ruling infringes his or her parental responsibility, if it was given or delivered without such person having been given an opportunity to be heard; or
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The enforcement of a decision or equivalent ruling shall be refused upon the application of the person against whom enforcement is sought where one of the grounds of non-recognition referred to in Article 38(1) is found to exist.
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The enforcement of a decision or equivalent ruling may be refused upon the application of the person against whom enforcement is sought where, by virtue of a change of circumstances since the decision was given or equivalent ruling delivered, the enforcement would be manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member State of enforcement because one of the following grounds exists:
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) other circumstances have changed to such an extent since the decision was given or equivalent ruling delivered, that its enforcement would now be manifestly incompatible with the best interests of the child.
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The applicant shall provide the court with a copy of the decision or equivalent ruling and, where necessary, a translation of the decision or equivalent ruling in accordance with Article 69 or a transliteration of it.
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 1
The recognition of a decision or equivalent ruling in matrimonial matters may not be refused because the law of the Member State in which such recognition is sought would not allow divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment on the same facts.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Article 60 – paragraph 1
(1) Each Member State shall designate one or more Central Authorities to assist with the application of this Regulation in matters of parental responsibility and shall specify the geographical or functional jurisdiction of each. Where a Member State has designated more than one Central Authority, communications shall normally be sent direct to the relevant Central Authority with jurisdiction. Where a communication is sent to a Central Authority without jurisdiction, the latter shall be responsible for forwarding it to the Central Authority with jurisdiction and informing the sender accordingly. (2) On the basis of notifications by the Member States, the Commission shall establish a list of central authorities with jurisdiction under this Regulation. (3) The Member States shall notify the Commission of any subsequent alterations to that list. The Commission shall amend the list accordingly. (4) The Commission shall publish the list and any subsequent amendments in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 2
Article 64 – paragraph 2
2. Where the pronouncement or issuing of a decision in matters of parental responsibility or the reaching of agreement between parties with parental authority is contemplated, an authority of a Member State, if the situation of the child so requires, may request any authority of another Member State which has information relevant to the protection of the child to communicate such information. The same possibility shall be provided for the eventuality of the pronouncement or issuing of a decision regarding parental authority, the finalisation of an authentic instrument, or the conduct of any other proceedings by the authorities with the necessary jurisdiction, in so far as these decisions, instruments or proceedings are concerned with measures for the protection of the child with regard to: (a) the designation and functions of a person or body having charge of the child's property, representing or assisting the child; (b) measures relating to the administration, conservation or disposal of the child's property, including the designation of a person or entity to deal with management of the child’s property; (c) the need for other bodies or authorities to permit or approve acts by the child.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 6 a (new)
(6a) The authorities of the Member State of the child's habitual residence, or of the Member State where a measure of protection has been taken, may deliver to the person having parental rights and responsibility or to the person entrusted with protection of the child's person or property, at his or her request or at the request of the authority concerned, a certificate indicating the capacity in which that person is entitled to act and the powers conferred upon him or her.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 6 b (new)
(6b) The capacity and powers indicated in the certificate are presumed to be vested in that person, in the absence of proof to the contrary.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 6 c (new)
(6c) Each Member State shall designate the authorities empowered to issue the certificate referred to paragraph (6b).
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 6 d (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 6 d (new)
(6d) On the basis of notifications by the Member States, the Commission shall establish a list of central authorities empowered to issue the certificate in question.
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 1
1. Where an authority having jurisdiction under this Regulation contemplates the placement of a child in the care of a family member, in secure institutional care or with a foster family in another Member State, it shall first obtain the consent of the competent authority in that other Member State . To that effect it shall, through the Central Authority of its own Member State, transmit to the Central Authority of the Member State where the child is to be placed a request for consent which includes a report on the child together with the reasons for the proposed placement or provision of care.