Activities of Manon AUBRY related to 2022/0117(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Protection of journalists and human rights defenders from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)
Amendments (67)
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for aDIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILon protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded orfrom abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) provides, inter alia, for the rights to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), freedom of expression and information, which includes respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media (Article 11), freedom of assembly and of association (Article 12) and to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47).
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) Article 12 of the Charter of fundamental rights (Freedom of assembly and of association) explicitly guarantees the right of everyone to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his or her interests, which is further consolidated in Article 28 of the Charter, guaranteeing the right of collective bargaining and action. In its consistent jurisprudence. Article 13 of the Charter also guarantees the freedom of the arts and sciences, including academic freedom. The right to freedom of expression and information should also be given expression through the exercise of these rights and freedoms as recognised by consistent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in relation to the interpretation of relevant provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), in the light of which the Charter shall be interpreted and applied pursuant to its Article 52(3).
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3 b) Article 13 of the Charter defines a self-standing fundamental freedom of art and science, in recalling that the arts and scientific research shall be free of constraint and academic freedom respected.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, againstand environmental rights defenders, but also civil society organisations, NGOs and trade unions, as well as researchers, academics, artists, whistleblowers and publishers of journalistic and artistic works, against abusive court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Journalists and press publishers play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that they are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Human rights and environmental defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes, promote accountability, without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders and environmental defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ+ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights, trade union rights or religious freedoms. Other participants in public debate, such as academics and researchers, scientists, educators, artists, cultural workers, social media activists and whistleblowers also deserve adequate protection.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) Women, LGBTIQ+ and gender rights defenders play a crucial role in achieving a gender-equal Europe. They should be able to promote accountability and have their voice heard in any case of gender-based harassement, violence, abuse or abuse of power relations, without suffering a second wave of gender-based harassement as victims of SLAPPs. Therefore, the objectives and provisions of this Directive are linked and should be interpreted towards the highest possible protection of gender-based SLAPP victims, also along with all relevant EU policies, including but not limited to the EU Equality Strategy, the new EU-wide proposal for a directive to combat violence against women and domestic violence, the Gender Equality Directives, the Directive on gender balance in corporate boards, the EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020- 2025), the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025, the Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030, and the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, the Gender Action Plan III and the EU Crime Initiative and all relevant texts in the future.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect journalists and human rightsall natural and legal persons who engage in public participation including journalists, human rights and environmental defenders from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate typically using harassment and intimidation.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations, politicians and state organs. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation.
Amendment 94 #
(11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of targeted natural or legal persons such as journalists and, human rights and environmental defenders and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on journalists and, human rights defendersand environmental defenders, academics, researchers, artists and any one active in public participation. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self- censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Those targeted by court proceedings against public participation may face multiple cases simultaneously, sometimes initiated in several jurisdictions. Proceedings initiated in the jurisdiction of one Member State against a person resident in another Member State are usually more complex and costly for the defendant. Claimants in court proceedings against public participation may also use procedural tools to drive up the length and cost of the litigation, and bring cases in a jurisdiction they perceive to be favourable for their case, rather than to the court best placed to hear the claim. Such practices also place unnecessary and harmful burdens on national court systems, hence constituting an abuse of judicial systems .
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) To foster prevention of SLAPP initiation and protection of targeted natural or legal person, it is crucial to promote relevant information, awareness raising, campaigns, education and training, including on their rights and protection mechanisms.
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Public participation should not normally cover commercial advertisement and marketing activity, which are typically not made in the exercise of freedom of expression and information.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products or services including the conditions under which these are produced or provided, where such matters are relevant to public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rights. A purely individual dispute between a consumer and a manufacturer or a service provider concerning a good, product or service should be covered only when the matter contains an element of public interest, for instance concerning a product or service which fails to comply with environmental or safety standards, labour rights, consumer rights or human rights, including the principle of non- discrimination.
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as delaying proceedings, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Strategic lawsuits against public participation are commonly characterised by claims that lack any legal merit, exhibit an imbalance of power and the abuse of rights or of process by the plaintiff. Abusive lawsuits against public participation typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as abusive or excessive damage claims, requesting disproportionate prior restraint measures, delaying proceedings, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice or genuinely exercising a right. The past records of the claimant and, in particular, any history of legal intimidation should also be considered when determining whether the court proceedings are abusive in nature.Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20 a) Abusive lawsuits against public participation are becoming more sophisticated and more effective, with one of the techniques used being multiple lawsuits filed against the same person on the same subject matter, meaning that all of them have to be defended and dealt with simultaneously and in parallel by the same person, which increases costs disproportionally.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 b (new)
Recital 20 b (new)
(20 b) Abusive lawsuits against public participation often infringe on victims’ right to defence recognised by the Charter, possibly also impacting on their right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence;
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest at stake is relevant to more than one Member State. That includes for instance public participation inacts which have a cross- border nature or dimension, such as events organised by Union institutions, such as appearances in public hearings, or statements or activities on matters that are of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such aswidely disseminated publications. It shall also include statements or activities on matters which the public of more than one Member State may legitimately take an interest on, and therefore are or may become of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such as economic or political activities of cross-border relevance, cross-border enjoyment or abuse of fundamental rights or freedoms under EU law, cross-border pollution or allegations of money laundering with potential cross- border involvement. The second situation where a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications is when the claimant or associated entities have initiated concurrent or previous court proceedings against the same or associated defendants in another Member State. These two types of situations take into consideration the specific context of SLAPPsabusive lawsuits against public participation.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22 a) Support should be available from the moment competent authorities become aware of the persons targeted by court proceedings against public participation and throughout the proceedings in accordance with the rights set out in this Directive. Support should be made available by a variety of means, including by providing comprehensive and independent information and advice, in a manner that is easily accessible to the public and free of charge, on procedures and remedies available, on protection against intimidation, harassment or threats of legal action, and on the rights of the person concerned, and by providing legal aid in cross-border civil proceedings, legal aid in further proceedings and legal counselling or other legal assistance which is deemed appropriate. Member States should provide for financial assistance and support measures, including psychological support, for those targeted by court proceedings against public participation
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) Any entity safeguarding or promoting the rights of persons engaging in public participation or otherwise bearing an interest in the defence of the public participation activity targeted by an abusive lawsuit againt public participation should have the opportunity to take part in those proceedings, either in support of the defendant or to provide information. Such possibility of legal representation should be without prejudice to the right and competences of trade unions and workers’ representatives to engage on behalf of or in support of workers in judicial proceedings, in accordance with other Union and national rules.
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover proceduralcosts, including procedural costs, legal representation costs and/or damages, when the court considers that even if the claim is not manifestly unfounded, there are elements indicating an abuse of procedure and the prospects for success in the main proceedings are low. A security does not entail a judgement on the merits but serves as a precautionary measure ensuring the effects of a final decision finding an abuse of procedure. It should be for Member States to decide whether a security should be ordered by the court on its own motion or upon request by the defendant.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) If a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it should be for the claimant in the main proceedings to prove in the accelerated procedure that the claim is not manifestly unfounded abusive lawsuit against public participation . This does not represent a limitation of access to justice, taking into account that the claimant carries the burden of proof in relation to that claim in the main proceedings and only needs to meet the much lower threshold of showing that the claim is not manifestly unfounded and is not abusive in order to avoid an early dismissal.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive per se. Where the domestic law does not guarantee the compensation of costs for legal representation beyond statutory fee tables, the court should be enabled to indemnify costs not encompassed in statutory fee tables through the award of damages. Full compensation of damages should include both material and immaterial damages, such as physical and psychological harm.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31 a (new)
Recital 31 a (new)
(31 a) Defendants should be allowed to seek damages in the same proceedings as those brought against them, through a counter claim where appropriate.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The main objective of giving courts or tribunals the possibility to impose penalties is to deter potential claimants from initiating abusive court proceedings against public participation. Such penalties should be determined on a case by case basis and be proportionate to the elements of abuse identified. When establishing amounts for penalties, courts should take into account the potential for a harmful or chilling effect of the proceedings on public participation, including as related to the nature of the claim, whether the claimant has initiated multiple or concerted proceedings in similar matters and the existence of attempts to intimidate, harass or threat the defendant.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32 a) Publicity of court decisions is a key element to deter potential abusive lawsuit against public participation and to strengthen the effectiveness of this Directive. Member States should establish a publicly accessible national register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive. The Commission should establish a publicly accessible register at EU level on the basis of the information from the national registers concerning relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive. National and EU registers should comply with relevant rules on the protection of personal data
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) In the cross-border context, it is also important to recognize the threat of SLAPPs from third countries targeting journalists, human rights defenders and other persons engaged in public participation who are domiciled in the European Union. They may involve excessive damages awarded against EU journalists, human rights defenders and otherspersons engaging in public participation. Court proceedings in third- countries are more complex and costly for the targets. To protect democracy and freedom of expression and information in the European Union and to avoid that the safeguards provided by this Directive are undermined by recourse to court proceedings in other jurisdictions, it is important to provide protection also against manifestly unfounded and abusive court proceedingsabusive lawsuits against public participation in third countries.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33 a) As regards jurisdiction for defamation claims or other claims based on civil or commercial law which could constitute abusive court proceedings against public participation, the Member State of domicile of the defendant should be considered as the sole forum, having due regard to cases where the victims of defamation are private persons. With the exception of that rule concerning cases falling within the scope of this Directive, this Directive should not affect the application of Regulation (EU) No1215/2012 of the European Parliamentand of the Council[1] (‘Brussels I Regulation’)1a Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 351, 20.12.2012, p.1).
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) This Directive creates a new special ground of jurisdiction in order to ensure that targets of SLAPPs domiciled in the European Union have an efficient remedy available in the Union against abusive court proceedings brought in a court or tribunal of a third country. This special ground of jurisdiction allows the targets domiciled in the European Union to seek, in the courts or tribunals of their domicile, for compensation of damages and costs incurred or reasonably expected to be incurred in connection with the proceedings before the court or tribunal of the third country. This right applies irrespective of the domicile of the claimant in the proceedings in the third country.
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35 a) Member States should take appropriate measures to ensure that the deontological rules that govern the conduct of legal professionals and the disciplinary sanctions for violation of those rules consider and include appropriate measures to discourage abusive lawsuits against public participation. These measures which be developed in close cooperation with relevant stakeholders including professional associations, social partners and civil society organisations.
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) This Directive is complementary to the Commission recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”). This recommendation is addressed to Member States and it provides a comprehensive toolbox of measures including training, awareness-raising, support to targets of abusive court proceedings and data collection, reporting and monitoring of court proceedings against public participation. When transposing this Directive, Member States should pay particular attention to the implementation of the Commission’s recommendations as regards, in particular, the inclusion of safeguards similar to those provided for by the Directive for domestic cases not covered by the Directive’s scope, and the provision of legal assistance to defendants in an affordable and easily accessible manner, and consider the inclusion in their national transposition laws of targeted provisions to that effect.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil mattersabusive lawsuits against public participation in civil matters as well as the threats thereof, having with cross- border implications brought against natural and legal persons, in particular journalists and, human rights and environmental defenders, on account of their engagement in public participation.
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
This Directive shall apply to matterlegals claims or actions of a civil or commercial nature with cross- border implications, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It shall not extend, in initiated or ongoing before a national court at the time of its entry into force., This Directive shall extend to any type of claim including interim and precautionary measures, counteractions or other particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters orype of remedies, and irrespective of the nature of the court or tribunal. It shall include civil claims brought in criminal proceedings. It shall not extend to claims invoking the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority (acta iure imperii).
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the rights such as the right to freedom of expression and information, the right of collective bargaining and action, the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, academic freedom, freedom of association and assembly on a matter of public interest, and preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto. This includes inter alia journalistic content, complaints, petitions, administrative or judicial claims and participation in public hearings. This shall also include any supporting or preparatory activities thereof, such as the provision by natural or legal persons, either on a professional or personal basis, of support to another person for purposes directly linked to public participation on a matter of public interest;
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rights, including consumer and labour rights;
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
(d) allegations of corruption, fraud or criminality, including tax evasion and financial criminality;
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e a (new)
(e a) activities advancing social change such as advocacy, reporting of breaches of the law or ethical norms, petitions, addressing government officials or private entities, engaging in peaceful protests or boycotts, or speaking out against or commenting on misuse or abuse of power.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e b (new)
(e b) (e b) scientific and research activities
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
3. ‘abusive court proceedinglawsuits against public participation’ mean court proceedings brought in relation to public participation that are fully or partially unfounded and have as their main purpose to prevent, restrict or penalize public participationcharacterised by elements indicative of an abusive use of the judicial process for purposes other than genuinely asserting, vindicating or exercising a right and have as their main purpose to prevent, restrict or penalize public participation. This includes claims which are manifestly unfounded and claims which, although bearing some legal merits, are of abusive nature. Indications of such a purposnature can be:
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
(a) the disproportionate, excessive, unfounded or unreasonable nature of the claim or part thereof;
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
(a a) the exploitation of economic advantage and political influence by the claimant against the defendant, leading to an imbalance of power between the two parties;
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(b a) the usage of litigation tactics deployed by the claimant, including as regards the choice of jurisdiction, or of dilatory or vexatious tactics;
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
(c a) a history of legal intimidation by the claimant or those acting on their behalf, in the form of threats, harassment, legal action or threat thereof;
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest against which court proceedings are initiated is or may be relevant to more than one Member State, orthe general public or its part in more than one Member State, either due to the cross- border nature or dimension of the act itself, or due to the interest which the public in different Member States may take in the matter of public interest concerned by the act, or due to links with the European Union laws or policies.
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) early dismissal of manifestly unfounded court proceedings in accordance with Chapter III;
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) remedies against abusive court proceedings in accordance with Chapter IV.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall provide that measures on procedural safeguards in accordance with Chapters III and IV as well as the security provided in Article 8 of this Directive, can be taken by the court or tribunal seised of the matter ex officio.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that non- governmental organisationentities safeguarding or promoting the rights of persons engaging in public participation may take part in those proceedings, either in support of the defendant or to provide informationsuch as non-governmental organisations, trade unions and other collective bodies acting in the interest of the defendant, professional and representative associations, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, international organisations and their bodies, such as the Council of Europe may take part in those proceedings, either in support of the defendant or to provide information. This provision is without prejudice to existing rights of representation and intervention as guaranteed by other Union or national rules.
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a Article 7a Third party substitution Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that subject to the defendant’s approval, entities with a legitimate interest in engaging on behalf of the defendant may substitute or otherwise represent the defendant in any proceedings covered under this directive. This provision is without prejudice to existing rights of representation and intervention as guaranteed by other Union or national rules.
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Member states shall ensure that in court proceedings against public participation, the court or tribunal seised has the power to require the claimant to provide security for costs, including procedural costs, or for procedurallegal representation, and associated costs and damages, if it considers such security appropriate in view of presence of elements indicating an abusive court procelawsuit against public participation as defined ings Article 3(3) of this Directive.
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
If security for costs is requested by the defendant, the court shall refuse to grant it only where the claimant has established a prima facie case as to each essential element of the cause of action and where it is satisfied that the claim is not characterised by elements of abuse.
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive
Chapter III – title
Chapter III – title
III Early dismissal of manifestly unfounded court proceedingsabusive lawsuits against public participation
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall empower courts and tribunals to adopt an early decision to dismiss, in full or in part, court proceedings which can be qualified as abusive lawsuits against public participation as manifestly unfoundeddefined in Article 3(3).
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States mayshall establish time limits for the exercise of the right to file an application for early dismissal. The time limits shall be proportionate and not render such exercise impossible or excessively difficult.
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it shall be for the claimant to prove that the claim is not manifestly unfounded abusive lawsuit against public participation as defined in Article 3(3) of this Directive.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Pursuant to paragraph 1, the court shall refuse to grant early dismissal only where the claimant has established a prima facie case as to each essential element of the cause of action and where it is satisfied that the claim is not characterised by elements of abuse.
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a claimant who has brought an abusive court proceedingslawsuit against public participation can beis ordered to bear all the costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant, unless such costs are excessive.
Amendment 292 #
Where the domestic law does not guarantee the compensation of costs for legal representation beyond statutory fee tables, the court should be enabled to indemnify costs not encompassed in statutory fee tables through compensation of damages pursuant to Article 15.
Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of an abusive court proceedingslawsuit against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm without having to initiate a dedicated separate court proceeding.
Amendment 300 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide that courts or tribunals seised of an abusive court proceedingslawsuit against public participation have the possibility to impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties on the party who brought those proceedings taking into account the amount of the claim and the financial situation of the claimant..
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a National Registers Member states shall establish a publicly accessible register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive, in full compliance with Union and national rules on the protection of personal data.
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that the recognition and enforcement of a third- country judgment in court proceedings on account of public participation by natural or legal person domiciled in a Member State is refused as manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) if those proceedings would have been considered manifestly unfounded or abusiveas an abusive lawsuit against public participation as defined in Article 3(3) if they had been brought before the courts or tribunals of the Member State where recognition or enforcement is sought and those courts or tribunals would have applied their own law.
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that, where a court refuses recognition and enforcement of a third-country judgment in accordance with paragraph 1, the defendant is able to request and obtain from the court or tribunal of the Member State where recognition or enforcement is sought a declaratory judgment on the abusive nature of court proceedings on account of public participation pursuant to its own law.
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, where abusive court proceedings on account of engagement in public participation have been brought in a court or tribunal of a third country against a natural or legal person domiciled in a Member State, that person mayshall have the right to seek, in the courts or tribunals of the place where he is domiciled, compensation of the damages and the costs incurred or reasonably expected to be incurred in connection with the proceedings before the court or tribunal of the third country, irrespective of the domicile of the claimant in the proceedings in the third country.
Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a More favourable treatment and non- regression clause 1. Member States may introduce or retain provisions more favourable than the safeguards provided for in this Directive against abusive court proceedings in civil matters 2. The implementation of this Directive shall under no circumstances constitute grounds for a reduction in the level of safeguards already afforded by Member States in the areas covered by this Directive.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide the Commission with all relevant information regarding the application of this Directive by [54 years from the date of transposition]. On the basis of the information provided, the Commission shall by [65 years from the date of transposition] at the latest, submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of this Directive. The report shall provide an assessment of the evolution of abusive court proceedings against public participation and the impact of this Directive in the Member States. If necessary, the report shall be accompanied by proposals to amend this Directive.