10 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2016/2066(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC has differed greatly among Member States, depending on the pre-existing level of national mediation systems, with some opting for a relatively literal implementation of its provisions, others for an in-depth revision of alternative ways to dispense justiceresolve disputes, and others deeming their existing laws to be already in line with the Mediation Directive;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas most Member States have extended the scope of application of their national transposing measures to domestic cases too; , and only three Member States have chosen to transpose the Directive with respect to cross-border cases only1a; _________________ 1a See the Commission report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the application of Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (COM(2016)0542), p. 5.
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the implementation of the Mediation Directive has provided EU added value by raising awareness among national legislators of the advantages of mediation, bringing about a degree of alignment with regard to procedural law and diverse practices in the Member States;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, even though Directive 2008/52/EC has been an extremely important milestone with regard to the implementation and use of mediation procedures in the European Union, the objectives stated in Article 1 of the Mediation Directive aimed at encouraging the use of mediation and in particular at achieving a ‘balanced relationship between mediation and judicial proceedings’ have clearly not been achieved to the extent expected, as mediation is used in less than 1 % of the cases in court on average in the majority of Member States16 ; _________________ 16 PE 571.395, p.25. PE 571.395, p.25.
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Mediation Directive has not created a Union system for out-of- court dispute resolution in the strictest sense, with the exception of the introduction of specific provisions in the field of expiration of limitation and prescription periods in legal proceedings when mediation is attemptused, and in the field of confidentiality obligations for the mediators and their administrative staff, which have been correctly implemented in all the Member States;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores howeverthe fact that only three Member States have chosen to transpose the Directive and notes that certain difficulties exist in relation to the functioning of the national mediation systems in practice, mainly related to the adversarial tradition and the lack of a mediation culture in the Member States and, the low level of awareness of mediation in the majority of Member States;, insufficient knowledge of how to deal with cross- border cases, and the functioning of the quality control mechanisms for mediators1a; _________________ 1aSee the Commission report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the application of Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (COM(2016)0542), p. 4.
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that all the Member States make provision for the possibility for courts to invite the parties to use mediation or at least to attend information sessions on mediation; notes that, in some Member States, participation in such information sessions is obligatory, on a judge’s initiative1a, or in relation to specific disputes prescribed by law, such as family matters2a; notes, likewise, that some Member States require lawyers to inform their clients of the possibility to use mediation, or that applications to the court confirm whether mediation has been attempted or whether there are any reasons which would stand in the way of such an attempt; _________________ 1a For example in the Czech Republic. 2aFor example in Lithuania, Luxembourg, and England and Wales.
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes and highlights the particular importance of mediation in the field of family law (especially in proceedings concerning child custody, access rights and child abduction cases), where it can create a constructive atmosphere for discussions and ensure fair dealings between parents; notes, further, that amicable solutions are likely to be long-lasting and can also address, in addition to the child’s primary residence, visitation arrangements or agreements concerning the child’s maintenance;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Welcomes the important role played by the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters in drawing up recommendations aimed at enhancing the use of family mediation in a cross-border context, in particular in child abduction cases;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on Member States to step up the exchange of best practice in the various national jurisdictions, which, supported by appropriate measures at European level, will help to boost awareness of how useful mediation is;