BETA

9 Amendments of Sharon BOWLES related to 2008/2233(INI)

Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas, however, it is absolutely essential that any measures proposed should be proportionate; moreover, they should not merely replicate what can already be achieved through existing national measures, they and unnecessary and inappropriate harmonisation should be avoided; whereas it is therefore preferable to have a stand-alone EU procedure; whereas consideration should be given as to whether such an EU procedure should be confinrestricted to cross-border claims and unnecessary and inappropriate harmonisation should be avoidedsituations or whether in the interests of equity it should be available as an option within Member States,
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Agrees with the Commission that cross- border debt recovery through enforcement of judicial decisions is a major internal market problem, but considers that none of the solutions mooted by the Commission will help withneed further work adequately to address the most difficult problem, that of recalcitrant debtors who are unscrupulous in honouring their civil obligations and have the means at their disposal to evade them;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that such a manual, to be made available on the European Judicial Network, could be useful at best as a general guide to what is available in other jurisdictions;deleted
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view, however, that such a manual will be of limited utility, laborious and expensive to produce and update, and inevitably lag behind changes in the law; considers that it will be of assistance only to persons wishing to do their own enforcement in a foreign country; points outObserves that such a manual might be laborious and expensive to produce and update, and for individuals seeking redress it might be easier to have one regime to deal with, and that, in the great majority of cases, the creditors will have to seek advice from a lawyers in the relevant foreign jurisdiction about what means of enforcement might be availabl; considers that, nevertheless, a streamlined version may have utility in the absence of a workable cross-border regime;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recommends that such a manual or streamlined version of the same be accessible online, be user-friendly, be written in simple language, and be kept up-to-date;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Strongly believes that launching national directories of foreign lawyers exercising their internal market rights under Directives 77/249*1 and 98/5**2 would be more cost-effective and more helpful to cruseful; points out that such national directories could be linkedi tors from a Commission website;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Insists that the definition of 'asset' used should be sufficiently broad as to prevent debtors having a ready basis upon which they can avoid disclosure of assets in trusts and nominee companies or joint accounts of which they are, for all practical purposes, the owner;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Argues that the assets to be disclosed in such a declaration should not be limited to those located in the European Union, but extend to assets held worldwide; also argues that to ensure that judgments are satisfied, debtors must demonstrate that the assets that they disclose are realisable in payment of the debt within a reasonable timeframe, and are not otherwise encumbered;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Insists that the form of such provisional measures must include procedural safeguards to protect defendants and third parties touched by the measures; takes the view that these include, though are not limited to, a good arguable case on the merits of the claim, and a real risk of dissipation of the assets to avoid payment;
2009/01/27
Committee: JURI