Activities of Klaus-Heiner LEHNE related to 2007/2189(INI)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (5)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Urges the Commission to takecarefully assess the issue of consumer redress very seriously bearing in mind the following considerations:
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 2 a (new)
Paragraph 3 – indent 2 a (new)
- safeguarding effective enforcement of rights originating from Community legislation is principally an obligation of Member States. They bear the responsibility to adapt their national (procedural) law in such a way that these rights are readily enforceable, to the benefit of consumers and economic operators. First of all, the Community is not competent to prescribe rules for national procedural law. Moreover, Article 5 of the Treaty requires the Community not to go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty; consequently, in accordance with that Article, the specific features of national legal systems must as far as possible be taken into account by leaving Member States free to choose between different options having equivalent effect;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 3
Paragraph 3 – indent 3
- it should be recalled that ADR systems are, by their nature, an alternative solution to traditional black-letter law mechanisms; the incentive to use ADR is therefore dependent on the existence of hard-law alternatives that provide effective, readily accessible and non-discriminatory redress for the consumer, such as collective redress mechanisms;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 4
Paragraph 3 – indent 4
- the Commission's approach to consumer redress is inchoate and v early stague; work on redress should be closely coordinated with, and integrated into, the future work programmes for judicial cooperation in civil mattersbefore any consideration is given to legislation on the European level, there needs to be a thorough examination of existing problems, if any, and of the envisaged benefits for consumers; considers in that context that, for instance, mass proceedings and cross-border problems need to be addressed specifically;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 5
Paragraph 3 – indent 5
- extensive research should be done into systems of collective redress, drawing on experience around the world, with a view to coming up with a straightforward system which avoids the worstspecial regard to the excesses and drawbacks of the US model;