159 Amendments of Giuseppe GARGANI
Amendment 1 #
2013/2130(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that Parliament welcomed, in principle, the introduction of delegated acts in Article 290 TFEU as providing greater scope for oversight as regards delegation of powers, but is concerned at the excessive use of delegated acts in Commission proposals, both as regards their number and scope or lack of precision, and whereas, furthermore, the Council has been tempted to convert such acts into implementing acts pursuant to Article 291 TFEU; emphasises that Article 290 explicitly limits the scope of delegated acts to non-essential elements of a legislative act and stresses that excessive use of delegation undermines the legitimacy of the legislative procedure; refers also, in this connec, but stresses that the conferral of such delegated powers, nor implementing powers under Article 291, is never an obligation; recognises that the use of delegated acts should be considered where flexibility and efficiency are needed and cannot be delivered by means of the ordinary legislative procedure, provided that the objective, content, scope and the duration of that delegation are explicitly defined and the conditions to which the delegation is subject are clearly laid down in the basic act; expresses concerns about the tendency of the Council to insist on implementing acts for provisions where only the basic act or delegated acts can be used; stresses that only for elements that do not amount to further political orientation the legislator may decide to allow for their adoption, to reasoned opinions by national Parliaments under Article 7(2) of Protocol No 2, which have concluded that the broad scope of delegation in a proposed act does not allow for an evaluation of whether the concrete legislative reality would be in conformity with the principle of subsidiarity or nothrough implementing acts; recognises that Article 290 explicitly limits the scope of delegated acts to non-essential elements of a legislative act and that for rules essential to the subject matter of the legislation therefore also delegated acts cannot be used;
Amendment 3 #
2013/2130(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights the greater role given to national parliaments in the Lisbon Treaty and stresses that, alongside the role which they play in monitoring respect for the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, they can and do make positive contributions in the framework of the Political Dialogue; considers that the active role which the national parliaments can play in guiding the members of the Council of Ministers and good cooperation between the European Parliament and the national parliaments can help to establish a healthy parliamentary counterbalance to the exercise of executive power in the functioning of the EU. Refers also to reasoned opinions by national Parliaments under Article 7(2) of Protocol No 2 that the broad scope of delegation under Art. 290 TFEU in a proposed acts does not allow for an evaluation of whether the concrete legislative reality would be in conformity with the principle of subsidiarity or not;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the exercise of its powers in respect of privileges and immunities, Parliament shall seek primarilyacts to uphold its integrity as a democratic legislative assembly and to secure the independence of its Members in the performance of their duties.
Amendment 16 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege, but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and its Members.
Amendment 17 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege, but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and its Members.
Amendment 18 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Parliament assesses whether the legal action requiring the waiver is motivated by a will to impede the functioning of Parliament or to attack the Member because of his or her membership of Parliament.
Amendment 18 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Acting on its own initiative or at the request of the Member concerned, Parliament may, at any stage of the procedure, review a decision to waive or defend immunity if the circumstances giving rise to an earlier decision have materially altered or if, given the course of the procedure to date, such action seems warranted.
Amendment 19 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The request for waiver of immunity is evaluated in accordance with the provisions of Articles 7, 8 and 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union and with the principles referred to in this Rule.
Amendment 19 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 a (new)
Rule 6a Defence of privileges and immunity 1. In cases where the privileges and immunities of a Member or former Member are alleged to have been breached by the authorities of a Member State, a request for a Parliament decision as to whether there has, in fact, been a breach of those privileges and immunities may be made in accordance with Rule 7(-1). 2. In particular, such a request for the defence of privileges and immunities may be made if it is considered that the circumstances constitute an administrative or other restriction imposed on the free movement of Members travelling to or from the place of meeting of Parliament or on an opinion expressed or a vote cast in the performance of the mandate or that they fall within aspects of Article 9 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the European Union. 3. A request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member shall not be admissible if a request for the waiver or defence of that Member’s immunity has already been received in respect of the same legal proceedings, whether or not a decision has been taken at that time. 4. No further consideration shall be given to a request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member if a request for the waiver of that Member’s immunity is received in respect of the same legal proceedings. 5. In cases where a decision has been taken not to defend the privileges and immunities of a Member, the Member may make a request to reconsider the decision, submitting new evidence. The request for reconsideration shall be inadmissible if proceedings have been instituted against the decision under Article 263 TFEU, or if the President considers that the new evidence submitted is not sufficiently substantiated to warrant reconsideration.
Amendment 20 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 6 a (new)
Rule 6a – Defence of immunity 1. In cases where the privileges or immunities of a Member or former Member are alleged to have been breached by the authorities of a Member State, a request may be made for the defence of those privileges or immunities. 2. A request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member shall not be admissible if a request for the waiver or defence of that Member’s immunity has already been received in respect of the same facts, whether or not a decision has been taken at that time. 3. No further consideration shall be given to a request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member if a request for the waiver of that Member’s immunity is received in respect of the same legal proceedings. 4. In cases where a decision has been taken not to defend the immunity of a Member, the Member may make a request to reconsider the decision only in the light of new facts. No request for defence shall be entertained where the matter to which the request relates is already before the Court of Justice.
Amendment 20 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 7 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. A competent authority of a Member State may address a request to the President to waive a Member’s immunity; a Member or a former Member may address a request to the President to defend privileges and immunities. Such requests shall be announced in Parliament and referred to the committee responsible.
Amendment 21 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 7 – paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. The committee shall lay down principles for the application of this Rule.
Amendment 24 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The competent committee shall consider whether the opinion expressed by the Member with respect to issues of general interest has a link with the performance of his duties as a representative of the European people.
Amendment 25 #
2013/2031(REG)
Rule 7 – paragraph 6
6. In cases concerning the defence of immunity or privileges, the committee shall stateassess whether the circumstances constitute an administrative or other restriction imposed on the free movement of Members travelling to or from the place of meeting of Parliament or an opinion expressed or a vote cast in the performance of the mandate or fall within aspects of Article 9 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities which are not a matter of national law, and shall make a proposal to invite the authority concerned to draw the necessary conclusions.
Amendment 5 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 1 –point i – point a
Recommendation 1 –point i – point a
Amendment 10 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 1 – point iii
Recommendation 1 – point iii
(iii) on no account shouldmust the EPPO exercise its competence with regard to offences committed before it becomes fully operative. Article 71 of the proposal should be amended accordingly;
Amendment 12 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 1 – point iv (new)
Recommendation 1 – point iv (new)
(iv) to make for greater certainty as to the law, the competent court should be determined beforehand, in keeping with the principle of the ‘natural adjudicator’. Article 27 of the proposal should be amended accordingly;
Amendment 13 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 1 – point v (new)
Recommendation 1 – point v (new)
(v) the European Public Prosecutor should be appointed for a term of four years, renewable once only. Furthermore, Deputies of the European Public Prosecutor should be appointed for a term of three years, renewable once only. Article 8 and Article 71(2) of the proposal should be amended accordingly;
Amendment 14 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 1 – point vi (new)
Recommendation 1 – point vi (new)
(vi) the means of investigation should be uniform, in order to avert forum shopping, and they should be compatible with the legal systems of the Member States;
Amendment 16 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 2
Recommendation 2
2. welcomes the fact that, under the regime applicable to non-contractual liability of the EPPO, the Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes over compensation for damage in similar terms to those set out in Article 268 TFEU; however, considers it problematic that two different courts – at EU and national level respectively – shall hear actions for non-contractual liability of the EPPO and actions for annulment of its procedural measures, including those from which a right to compensation for damage may arise, and recommends to the Council that Articles 36 and 69 of the proposal be amended accordingly;
Amendment 18 #
2013/0255(APP)
Draft opinion
Recommendation 3
Recommendation 3
3. deplores that, notwithstandrecommends that, in accordance with the provisions laid down ing Article 86(1) TFEU clearly lays down that, whereby the Council may establish an EPPO ‘from Eurojust’, the Commission envisages a major merely a transfer of humanfinancial resources from OLAF to the EPPO, instead of and that EPPO takinge advantage of the expertise and the added value of Eurojust’s staff members;
Amendment 63 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, where a claimant has presented reasonably available facts and evidence showing plausible grounds for suspecting that he, or those he represents, has suffered harm caused by the defendant’s infringement of competition law, national courts can order the defendant or a third party to disclose evidence, regardless of whether or not this evidence is also included in the file of a competition authority, subject to the conditions set out in this Chapter. Member States shall ensure that c and in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 of this Directive. Member States shall ensure that the national courts request the disclosure of evidence from the national competition authority where the defendant does not provide the evidence requested. Courts are also able to order the claimant or a third party to disclose evidence on request of the defendant.
Amendment 69 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall ensure that national courts limit disclosure of evidence to that which is proportionate and necessary for the purpose of estimating the harm caused, pursuant to Article 2 of this Directive. In determining whether any disclosure requested by a party is proportionate, national courts shall consider the legitimate interests of all parties and third parties concerned. They shall, in particular, consider:
Amendment 80 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that, to the extent that their courts have powers tobefore ordering disclosure without, the national courts hearing the person from whom disclosure is sought, no penalty for non-compliance with such an order may be imposed until the addressee of such an order has been heard by the court.
Amendment 89 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
internal documents of the national competition authority, correspondence between the Commission and the national competition authorities or between the latter within the European Competition Network;
Amendment 93 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Disclosure of evidence in the file of a competition authority that does not fall into any of the categories listed in paragraphs 1 or 2 of this Article may be ordered in actions for damages at any timeonly after the statement of objections (or other equivalent national competition authority document); disclosure shall be without prejudice to the power of the national competition authority to defer access, for reasons relating to the investigations, until the end of the antitrust proceedings.
Amendment 135 #
2013/0185(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
(1) The suspension referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article may not, in any case, have a duration exceeding one year.
Amendment 52 #
2013/0119(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The aim of this Regulation idoes not to change the substantive law of the Member States relating to birth, death, name, marriage, registered partnership, parenthood, adoption, residence, citizenship or nationality, real estate, legal status of a company or other undertaking, intellectual property rights or absence of a criminal record.
Amendment 64 #
2013/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A trade mark may consist of any signs, in particular words, including personal names, designs, models, motifs, devices, logos, letters, numerals, colours as such, the shape of goods or of their packaging, or sounds, provided that such signs are capable of:
Amendment 80 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Trademarks must confer on their proprietors exclusive rights which must be protected in the course of trade. In this connection ‘the course of trade’ should be understood as covering all trade-related operations, including import, export, production, transit and trans-shipment, taking place on EU territory, even where the products concerned are not intended for release onto the EU market.
Amendment 88 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure legal certainty and safeguard trade mark rights legitimately acquired, it is appropriate and necessary to lay down, without affecting the principle that the later trade mark cannot be enforced against the earlier trade mark, that proprietors of European trade marks should not be entitled to oppose the use of a later trade mark when the later trade mark was acquired at a time when the earlier trade mark could not be enforced against the later trade mark. When carrying out checks, customs authorities must make use of the powers and procedures laid down in EU legislation regarding customs enforcement of intellectual property rights.
Amendment 100 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
Article 4 – introductory part
Article 4 – introductory part
A European trade mark may consist of any signs, in particular words, including personal names, designs, models, motifs, devices, logos, letters, numerals, colours as such, the shape of goods or of their packaging, or sounds, provided that such signs are capable of
Amendment 111 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) importing or exportproducing or entering for a suspensive procedure, importing or exporting, re-exporting or trans-shipping the goods under that sign;
Amendment 116 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The proprietor of a European trade mark shall also be entitled to prevent the importing into the European Union of goods referred to in paragraph 3(c) where only the consignor of the goods acts forin the context of commercial purposesactivity.
Amendment 120 #
2013/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. The proprietor of a European trade mark shall also be entitled to prevent all third parties from bringing goods, in the context of commercial activity, into the customs territory of the Union without beingtheir being intended for released for free circulation there, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries and bear without authorization a trade mark which is identical or similar to the European trade mark registered in respect of such goods in accordance with paragraph 2, points (a), (b) and (c) of this article, or which cannot be distinguished in its essential aspects from that trade mark.'; The customs authorities shall, inter alia on a complaint from the right holder, carry out appropriate checks based on risk analysis criteria on goods in transit through the territory of the Union on their way to a third country which are suspected of infringing an intellectual property right for which protection has been sought.
Amendment 25 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The safety of products should be assessed taking into account all the relevant aspects, in particular their characteristics, composition and presentation as well as the categories of consumers who are likely to use the products taking into account their vulnerability, and in particular children, the elderly and the disabled.
Amendment 28 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The indication of origin supplements the basic traceability requirements concerning the name and address of the manufacturer. In particular, the indication of the country of origin helps to identify the actual place of manufacture in all those cases where the manufacturer cannot be contacted or its given address is different from the actual place of manufacture. Modern business processes regarding the purchasing and processing of materials are such that the indication of the country of origin of the finished product is insufficient to provide consumers with full and trustworthy information on the true origin of that product. Indicating the country of origin of the materials used in the product guarantees consumers the right to make purchasing choices in full knowledge of the facts. Such information can facilitate the task of market surveillance authorities in tracing the product back to the actual place of manufacture and enable contacts with the authorities of the countries of origin in the framework of bilateral or multilateral cooperation on consumer product safety for appropriate follow up actions.
Amendment 35 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Manufacturers and importers shall ensure that products bear an indication of the country of origin of the product and of the materials used in it or, where the size or nature of the product does not allow it, that indication is to be provided on the packaging or in a document accompanying the product.
Amendment 43 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) "“gambling services"” means any service which involves wagering a stake with monetary value, or which can be converted into money, in games of chance including those with an element of skill such as lotteries, bingo, casino games, poker games and betting transactions that are provided at a physical location, or by any means at a distance, by electronic means or any other technology for facilitating communication, and at the individual request of a recipient of services;
Amendment 51 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a Member States shall ensure that gambling service providers use one or more current accounts dedicated exclusively to the activities related to the services provided.
Amendment 63 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) by reporting any transactions ‘from’ and ‘to’ gambling service providers who do not have any permit, authorisation or licence;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2829(RSP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for at least half the members of the next Commission to be drawn from Members of the European Parliament elected in 2014 thereby reflecting the balance between the two chambers of the legislature; calls on the political groups and parties to ensure such a composition by establishing criteria which guarantee balanced political and national representation;
Amendment 44 #
2012/0146(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) One of the objectives of this Regulation is to remove existing barriers to the cross-border use of electronic identification means used in the Member States to access at least public services. This Regulation does not aim at intervening on electronic identity management systems and related infrastructures established in the Member States. The aim of this Regulation is to ensure that for the access to cross-border online services offered by the Member States, secure electronic identification and authentication is possiblea high degree of security can be provided for electronic identification and authentication, for instance by establishing security levels adjusted according to the types of services to be accessed.
Amendment 50 #
2012/0146(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules for electronic identification and electronic trust services for electronic transactions with a view to ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market, guaranteeing a high degree of security, and increasing citizens’ confidence in the digital environment.
Amendment 77 #
2012/0146(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the electronic identification means have built-in security levels adjusted according to the types of services to which they give access;
Amendment 89 #
2012/0146(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, lay down the criteria defining the security levels corresponding to the types of services to which the electronic identification scheme gives access.
Amendment 92 #
2012/0146(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a description of the notified electronic identification scheme, including the security levels corresponding to the types of services to be accessed;
Amendment 57 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘competent authority’ means an authority designated by a Member State to perform function, in accordance with national laws uander/or practices, for the purpose of implementing this Directive;
Amendment 59 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) The competent authorities may include the liaison offices under Article 4 of Directive 96/71/EC;
Amendment 62 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) Contact details of the competent authorities shall be communicated to the Commission and the other Member States. The Commission shall publish and regularly update the list of the competent authorities and liaison offices.
Amendment 64 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Amendment 69 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purpose of implementing, applying and enforcing Directive 96/71/EC the competent authorities shall take into account factual elements characterising the activities carried out by an undertaking in the State in which it is established in order to determine whether it genuinely performs substantial activities, other than purely internal management and/or administrative activities. Such elements mayshall include:
Amendment 78 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4
Article 4
Amendment 79 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the appropriate measures to ensure that the information on the terms and conditions of employment referred to in Article 3 of Directive 96/71/EC which are to be applied and complied with by service providers, including those laid down in collective agreements, are made generally available in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible way at a distance and by electronic means, in formats and by web standards that ensure access to persons with disabilities and to ensure that the liaison offices or the other competent national bodies referred to in Article 4 of Directive 96/71/EC are in a position to carry out their tasks effectively.
Amendment 81 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Amendment 88 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
5. Member States shall supply the information requested by other Member States or the Commission by electronic means as soon as possible and at the latest within 2 weeks from the reception of a request. Where the request is of an urgent nature, the information must be sent within three days of the reception of the request.
Amendment 90 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 94 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. In the circumstances referred to in Article 3 (1) and (2) and Article 9(1), the Member State of establishment of the service provider shall assist the Member State to which the posting takes place to ensure compliance with the conditions applicable under Directive 96/71/EC and this Directive. The Member State of establishment of the service provider shall, on its own initiative, communicate to the Member State to which the posting takes place any relevant information as specified in Articles 3 (1) and (2) and 9(1), where the Member State of establishment of the service provider is aware of specific facts which indicate possible irregularities.
Amendment 95 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities of the host Member State may equally ask the competent authorities of the Member State of establishment, for each instance where services are provided or for each service provider, to provide information as to the legality of the service provider’s establishment, the service provider’s good conduct, and the absence of any infringement of the applicable rules. The competent authorities of the Member State of establishment shall provide this information in accordance with Article 6.
Amendment 97 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may onlyshall impose the following administrative requirements and control measures:
Amendment 99 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point q
(a) an obligation for a service provider established in another Member State to make a simple declaration to the responsible national competent authorities at the latest atby the commencement of the service provision, whereby the declaration may only cover the identity of the service provider, the presence of one or more clearly identifiable posted workers, their anticipated number, the anticipated duration and location of their presence, and the services justifying the posting;
Amendment 102 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 103 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Amendment 104 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 112 #
Amendment 114 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 116 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 117 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 118 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 120 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 121 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 122 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Amendment 125 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 127 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 132 #
2012/0061(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Amendment 19 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Rule 19 – interpretation (new)
Rule 19 – interpretation (new)
Amendment 23 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 24 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Annex I – Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Members may not be elected as office- holders of Parliament or one of its bodies, appointed as rapporteur, or participate in an official delegation, if they have not submitted their declaration of financial interests.
Amendment 25 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 2
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 2
Members of Parliament shall refrain from accepting any gifts or similar benefits in the performance of their duties. , except those with a very limited value given in accordance with courtesy usage or those given to them in accordance with courtesy usage when they are representing Parliament in an official capacity.
Amendment 26 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – point c a (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) any remunerated activity which the Member undertakes alongside the exercise of his or her office, whether as an employee or as a self-employed person,
Amendment 27 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – point c b (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – point c b (new)
Amendment 28 #
Amendment 29 #
2011/2174(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 a (new)
Annex I – Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a Former Members who engage in professional lobbying or representational activities directly linked to the European Union decision-making process may not benefit from the facilities granted to former Members under Article 1(d) of the Bureau decision to that effect1. __________________ 1 Bureau Decision of 12 April 1999.
Amendment 31 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft Report
Annex I (new) – Article 1 (new)
Annex I (new) – Article 1 (new)
Amendment 33 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I – Article 2 (new)
Annex I – Article 2 (new)
Amendment 36 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 3 (new)
Annex I (new) – Article 3 (new)
Amendment 39 #
2011/2174(REG)
Annex I – article 4 – paragraph 1 (new)
Amendment 40 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point a
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 41 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point c (new)
Annex I – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point c (new)
Amendment 42 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I – Article 2 (new) – paragraph 2 – point d (new)
Annex I – Article 2 (new) – paragraph 2 – point d (new)
Amendment 43 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point e
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 44 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point f
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point f
Amendment 45 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point h
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – point h
Amendment 46 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – subparagraphs 2 and 3
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 2 – subparagraphs 2 and 3
Amendment 47 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 3
Annex I (new) – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 3
Amendment 48 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 4
Annex I – Article 4 (new) – paragraph 4
Amendment 53 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Article 5 (new)
Annex I (new) – Article 5 (new)
Amendment 54 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I – Article 6 (new)
Annex I – Article 6 (new)
Former Members who engage in professional lobbying or representational activities directly linked to the European Union decision-making process may not benefit from the facilities granted to former Members under Article 1(d) of the rules laid down by the Bureau to that effect1 . __________________ 1 Bureau Decision of 12 April 1999. Bureau Decision of 12 April 1999.
Amendment 59 #
2011/2174(REG)
Draft report
Annex I (new) – Articles 7 - 9 (new)
Annex I (new) – Articles 7 - 9 (new)
Advisory Committee on the Conduct of 1. An Advisory Committee on the Conduct of Members ("the Advisory Committee") is hereby established. 2. The Advisory Committee shall be composed of five members, appointed by the President at the beginning of his or her term-of-office from amongst the members of the bureaux and the coordinators of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the Committee on Legal Affairs, taking due account of the Members' experience and of political balance. Each Member of the Advisory Committee shall serve as chair for six months on a rotating basis. 3. The President shall also, at the beginning of his or her term-of-office, nominate reserve Members for the Advisory Committee, one for each group not represented in the Advisory Committee. In the event of an alleged breach of this Code of Conduct by a Member of a political group not represented in the Advisory Committee, the relevant reserve Member shall serve as a 6th full Member of the Advisory Committee for the alleged breach under consideration. 4. The Advisory Committee shall give guidance to Members for the interpretation and implementation of the provisions of this Code of Conduct. On request of the President, the Advisory Committee shall also assess alleged cases of breach of this Code of Conduct and advise the President on possible action to be taken. 5. The Advisory Committee may, after consulting the President, seek advice from outside experts. Procedure in the event of possible breaches of the Code of Conduct 1. Where there is reason to think that a Member may have breached this Code of Conduct, the President may refer the matter to the Advisory Committee. 2. The Advisory Committee shall examine the circumstances of the alleged breach, and on the basis of the conclusions of its findings, make a recommendation to the President on a possible decision. 3. If, taking into account the advice of the Advisory Committee, the President concludes that the Member concerned has breached the Code of Conduct, he or she shall, after hearing the Member, adopt a reasoned decision laying down a penalty, which he or she shall notify to the Member. The penalty may consist of one or more of the measures listed in Article 153(3) of the Rules of Procedure. 4. The internal appeal procedures defined in Rule 154 of the Rules of Procedure shall be open to the Member concerned. 5. Any penalty imposed on a Member after the expiry of the time-limits laid down in Rule 154 of the Rules of Procedure shall be announced by the President in plenary and published on Parliament's website for the remainder of the parliamentary term. The Bureau shall lay down Implementing Measures to this Code of Conduct, including a monitoring procedure, and shall update the amounts referred to in Articles 4 and 5, when necessary. It may bring forward proposals to revise this Code of Conduct.rticle 7 Deleted Members Article 8 Article 9 Implementation
Amendment 26 #
2011/0455(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) It is appropriate to provide a more flexible framework for the employment of contract staff. The institutions of the European Union should therefore be enabled to engage contract staff for a maximum period of six years in order to perform tasks under the supervision of officials or temporary staff. In addition, while the vast majority of officials will continue to be recruited on the basis of open competitions, the institutions should be authorised to organise internal competitions which are also open to contract staff, including those working for executive agencies.
Amendment 19 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In view of the detrimental effects on competition, negotiated procedures without a call for competition should only be used in very exceptional circumstances and below the thresholds stated in Article 12, with sufficient justification. This exception should be limited to cases where publication is either not possible, for reasons of force majeure in line with the standing case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, or where it is clear from the outset that publication would not trigger more competition, not least because there is objectively only one economic operator that can perform the contract. Only situations of objective exclusivity can justify the use of the negotiated procedure without a call for competition, where the situation of exclusivity has not been created by the contracting entity itself with a view to the future procurement procedure, and where there are no adequate substitutes, the availability of which should be assessed thoroughly.
Amendment 42 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Contracting entities shall indicate, in the contract notice, in the invitation to confirm interest, or, where the means of calling for competition is a notice on the existence of a qualification system, in the invitation to tender or to negotiate, whether tenders are limited to one or more lots only and if they are not subdivided into lots, providing a specific explanation for this.
Amendment 47 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 73 – paragraph 1 bis (new)
Article 73 – paragraph 1 bis (new)
1a. The fulfilment of pooling requirements may not be used at the same time by the assisting and benefiting entities.
Amendment 54 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Costs may bare assessed, at the choice of the contracting entity, on the basis of the price only or using a cost- effectiveness approach, such as a life-cycle costing approach, under the conditions set out in Article 77.
Amendment 71 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 79 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph -1 (new)
Article 79 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph -1 (new)
-1.The contracting entity specifies in the invitation to tender that the maximum accepted discount cannot exceed 25 % of the lowest tender price.
Amendment 30 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
(6) ‘a bodiesy governed by public law’ means a bodiesy that haves all of the following characteristics:
Amendment 31 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
(a) they areit is established for or have the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial or commercial character; for that purpose, a body which operates in normal market conditions, aims to make a profit, and bears the losses resulting from the exercise of its activity does not have the purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial or merely industrial and commercial character;
Amendment 32 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
(b) ithey haves legal personality;
Amendment 33 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘public supply contracts’ means public contracts having as their object the purchase, lease, rental or hire-purchase, with or without an option to buy, of products. A public supply contract may include the provision of supplies broken down into various instalments. A supply contract may include, as an incidental matter, siting and installation operations;
Amendment 57 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The term of a framework agreement shall not exceed foursix years, save in exceptional cases duly justified, in particular by the subject of the framework agreement.
Amendment 61 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 49 – paragraph 3
Article 49 – paragraph 3
3. Notices referred to in Article 46(2) and Article 47 shall be published in full in an official language of the Union as chosen by the contracting authority. That language version shall constitute the sole authentic text. A summary of the important elements of each notice shall be published in the other official languages.
Amendment 62 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 81 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 62 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 62 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The requirements for reliance on the capacities of other entities may not be used contextually by the economic operator or said entities.
Amendment 100 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 69 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1. The contracting authority states in the invitation to tender that the maximum possible discount cannot exceed 25 % of the base tender price.
Amendment 257 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Persons or firms referred to in paragraph 2 shall not solicit or accept money,any gifts or favourand/or benefits from anyone with whom the statutory audit or audit firm has a contractual relationship.
Amendment 281 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A statutory auditor or an audit firm carrying out statutory audit of public- interest entities may not provide to the audited entity, to its parent undertaking and to its controlled undertakings statutory audit services and related financial audit services.
Amendment 286 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where the statutory auditor belongs to a network, a member of such network may not provide to the audited entity, to its parent undertaking and to its controlled undertakings within the Union statutory audit services or related financial audit services.
Amendment 370 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 377 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 5
Amendment 383 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 384 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 396 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Amendment 432 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Amendment 442 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Amendment 452 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point t
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point t
(t) give an opinion which shall state clearly the opinion of the statutory auditor(s) or the audit firm(s) as to whether the annual or consolidated financial statements give a true and fair view and have been prepared in accordance with the relevant financial and asset-related reporting framework and, where appropriate, whether the annual or consolidated financial statements comply with statutory requirements; the audit opinion shall be either unqualified, qualified, an adverse opinion or, if the statutory auditor(s) or audit firm(s) are unable to express an audit opinion, a disclaimer of opinion. In case of a qualified or an adverse opinion or a disclaimer of opinion, the report shall explain the reasons of such decision;
Amendment 533 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Unless it concerns the renewal of an audit engagement in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 33(1), the recommendation shall contain at least twohree choices for the audit engagement and the audit committee shall express a duly justified preference for one of them.
Amendment 611 #
2011/0359(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Amendment 113 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The reports should serve to facilitate governments of resource-rich countries in implementing the EITI Principles and Criteria and account to their citizens for payments such governments receive from undertakings active in the extractive industry or loggers of primary forests operating within their jurisdiction. The report should incorporate disclosures on a country and project basis, where a project is considered as the lowestthe basis of the country and the level of opernational reporting unit at which the undertaking prepares regular inter/federal, state/regional management reports, such as a concession, geographical basin, etc and where payments have been attributed to such projects. In the light of the overall objective of promoting good governance in these countries, the materiality of payments to be reported should be assessed in relation to the recipient government. Various criteria on materiality could be envisaged such as payments of an absolute amount, or a percentage threshold (such as payments in excess of a percentage of a country's GDP) and these can be defined through a delegated actd local government. Provision should be made for an overall disclosure threshold which should take account of the objective of promoting good governance and limiting the misappropriation of significant amounts of government revenue in these countries; it should also take into account the need to respond to the call for greater transparency and to ensure that an appropriate balance is struck between costs and benefits and the competitiveness of European undertakings. The reporting regime should be subject to a review and a report by the Commission within fivthree years of the entry into force of the Directive. The review should consider the effectiveness of the regime and take into account international developments including issues of competitiveness and energy security. The review should also take into account the experience of preparers and users of the payments information and consider whether it would be appropriate to include additional payment information such as effective tax rates and recipient details, such as bank account informationreduce or extend the disclosure requirements, or to strengthen and support measures such as capacity building (development of the capacity and potential of the area to which the investments refer) in third countries.
Amendment 188 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall require large undertakings and all public interest entities active in the extractive industry or the logging of primary forests to prepare and make public a report on payments made to governments on an annual basisrelating to the extractive industry and forestry activities defined in Article 36.
Amendment 191 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37a To ensure that the undertakings which are required to prepare reports on payments to governments under Chapter 9 of this Directive are not subject to multiple disclosure requirements or equivalent measures, the following shall apply: (a) the Commission shall propose measures to facilitate the conclusion of mutual recognition agreements or exemption mechanisms with those third countries which require their extractive or forestry industries to publish reports that are comparable to those required under Chapter 9 of this Directive; (b) where an undertaking has to report payments to the levels of government in a country which has adhered to the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI), the undertaking shall be authorised to include in the report required pursuant to Article 37 the payment information provided for by the EITI disclosure requirements, for the purpose of complying with the provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 195 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the total amount of payments, including payments in kind, made to each governmentlevel of recipient government, be it federal, national, state, regional or local, as defined in Article 36 of this Directive, within a financial year;
Amendment 197 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the total amount per type of payment, including payments in kind, made to each governmentlevel of recipient government, be it federal, national, state, regional or local, as defined in Article 36 of this Directive, within a financial year;
Amendment 200 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 237 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) other direct benefits to the government concernedpayments to governments that are commonly considered to be part of the flow of revenue for the commercial development of the oil, gas, mineral resources and forestry sectors.
Amendment 246 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 4
Article 38 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 42 in order to specify the concept of materiality of paymentsIn order to meet the objectives of Chapter 9 of this Directive, undertakings shall report on payments in the carry-over currency. A disclosure threshold of USD 1 million shall be applied for payments made to the same level of government for the same type of tax. Where an undertaking makes more than one payment to the same level of government for the same tax in a given period, such payments shall be aggregated before the disclosure threshold is applied.
Amendment 254 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 5
Article 38 – paragraph 5
5. The report shall exclude any type of payments made to a government in a country where the public disclosure of this type of payment is clearly prohibited by the criminal legislation of that country. In such caseslegislation or the rules or contracts drawn up with the administrative authorities of that country. In case of such restrictions, the undertaking shall state that it has not reportdisclosed payments in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 3, and shall disclose the name of the government concerned.
Amendment 259 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State shall require any large undertaking or any public interest entity active in the extractive industry or the logging of primary forestsor forestry industry and governed by its national law to draw up a consolidated report on payments made to governments by such undertakings and public interest entities and by subsidiaries or entities under the control of that undertaking or public interest entity in accordance with Articles 37 and 38 if that parent undertaking is under the obligation to prepare consolidated financial statements as laid down in Article 23(1) to 23(6) of this Directive.
Amendment 265 #
2011/0308(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall review and report on the implementation and effectiveness of this Chapter, in particular as regards the scope of the reporting obligations andcosts and benefits the transparency requirements involve and the scope of the reporting requirements, including the modalities of the reporting on a project basis. The review should also take into account international developments and consider the effects on competitiveness and on the security of energy supply for European industry. It should be completed at the latest fivthree years after the date of entry into force of this Directive. The report shall be submitted to the European Parliament and the Council, together withaccompanied by a legislative proposal, if appropriate.
Amendment 96 #
2010/0383(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. In cases referred to in paragraph 1, the court first seised shall establish its jurisdiction within six monththirty days except where duly substantiated exceptional circumstances make this impossible. Upon request by any other court seised of the dispute, the court first seised shall inform that court of the date on which it was seised and of whether it has established jurisdiction over the dispute or, failing that, of the estimated time for establishing jurisdiction.
Amendment 98 #
2010/0383(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4
Article 29 – paragraph 4
4. Where the agreed or designated seat of an arbitration is in a Member State, the courts of another Member State whose jurisdiction is contested on the basis of an arbitration agreement shall stay proceedings once the courts of the Member State where the seat of the arbitration is located or the arbitral tribunal have been seised of proceedings to determine, as their main object or as an incidental question, the existence, validity or effects of that arbitration agreement. This paragraph does not prevent the court whose jurisdiction is contested from declining jurisdiction in the situation referred to above if its national law so prescribes. Wplaintiff has lodged an application belatedly or illegally, the court previously seised, in a decision contesting that court's jurisdiction in favour of any court other than the court first seised, may order him to pay a sum of money proportionate to the value of the dispute, the amount being no higher than 10% of the value of the action, without prejudice to the compensation for damages that might be claimed by the other party. It shall be assumed that the plaintiff has acted belatedly or illegally where the existence, validity or effects of the arbitration agreement are established, the court seised shall decline jurisdiction. This paragraph does not apply in disputes concerning matters referred to in Sections 3, 4, and 5 of Chapter II.has lodged an application in breach of a jurisdiction clause that he knew, or that he did not know owing to his own negligence. deleted
Amendment 40 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The introduction of this specific category of servants does not affect Article 29 of the Staff Regulations which provides that internal competitions are only open to officials and temporary staff. No provision of this regulation may therefore be construed as giving accredited Parliamentary assistants privileged or direct access to posts of officials or other categories of servants of the European Communities or to internal competitions for such posts.
Amendment 43 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The contracts of accredited parliamentary assistants concluded between them and the European Parliament shouldall be based on mutual and legitimate trust between the parliamentary assistant and the Member or Members of the European Parliament whom he assists. Such contracts must be directly linked to the duration of the term of office of the Member(s) concerned.
Amendment 44 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Accredited parliamentary assistants must have the right of association, to be exercised separately from the system established for officials and other servants.
Amendment 53 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation no 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 1 – Article 126 – paragraph 2
Chapter 1 – Article 126 – paragraph 2
2. Article 1e of the Staff Regulations, on measures of a social nature and working conditions, shall apply by analogy, provided that such measures are compatible with the particular nature of the tasks and responsibilities taken on by accredited parliamentary assistants. By way of derogation from Article 7, the arrangements relating to the autonomous representation of accredited parliamentary assistants shall be laid down by the implementing measures referred to in Article 125(3).
Amendment 96 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 6 – Article 137 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Chapter 6 – Article 137 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The implementing measures referred to in Article 127(3) may lay down rules for the calculation of the amounts referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.
Amendment 2 #
2007/2266(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 121 - paragraph 3
Rule 121 - paragraph 3
3. The President shall bring an action on behalf of Parliament in accordance with the recommendation ofsubmit observations or intervene on behalf of Parliament in any court proceedings, after consulting the committee responsible. AtIf the start of the following part-session, he may put to plenary the decision on maintaining the action. Should plenary rule against the action by a majority of the votes cast, he shall withdraw it. Should the President bring an action contrary toPresident intends to depart from the opinion of the committee responsible, the matter shall be submitted to plenary without delay. In cases of urgency, the President may act provisionally on the basis of the recommendation of the Chairman of the committee responsible, he shall put to plenary, at the start of the following part- session, the decision on maintaining the action. In this case, the procedure provided for in this paragraph shall be implemented at the earliest opportunity.
Amendment 1 #
2007/2205(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Parliament is the main transnational legislative institution in Europe which, moreover, has no legal personality; whereas as sucha result it is often impeded in protecting its prerogatives before national courts from problems that are peculiar to its special nature,
Amendment 2 #
2007/2205(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to take account of possible requests by the European Parliament to activate thebring infringement procedureedings against any State accused of havingfor breached a of parliamentary prerogatives and urges the Commission therefore to inform it, through the Commissioner responsible or the Director- General of the Legal Service, but always in writing and exhaustively, of its reasons for any decision in this regard, especially should itasks that it be given a comprehensive statement of reasons by the competent Commissioner should the College decide not to take anythe action requested;
Amendment 3 #
2007/2205(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. UrSuggests the application of the legal model underat an in-depth examination be carried out into whether the legal concept laid down in Article 300(6) of the EC Treaty to all thosemay be applied in cases in which the prerogatives of the European Parliament are seriously under threat, so as to allowing Parliament to ask the Court of Justice for an opinion on the compatibility of a certaigiven act of national law with primary Community law, without prejudice to the exclusive power of the Commission to decide whether or not to initiate infringement proceedings against the State which may have committed an infringement;
Amendment 4 #
2007/2205(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Proposes that the committee responsible be asked to study an amendment to Rule 1921(3) of its Rules of Procedure to the effect thaton the following lines: ‘3. The President shall, as appropriate, bring an action on behalf of Parliament, enter a defence, or intervene or otherwise submit observations, including as a party concerned or amicus curiae, in accordance with the recommendation of the Chairman of its Cthe committee on Legal Affaresponsible expressing the view of that committee. Paragraphs 1 and 2 and the first should be expressly appointed to represent the European Parliament in court in all legal proceedings in which its prerogatives are at issue; ubparagraph of this paragraph shall apply mutatis mutandis to proceedings before national courts and the European Court of Human Rights, and to any other judicial proceedings in which Parliament is given leave to intervene. The decision whether to seek leave to intervene should be taken in accordance with the recommendation of the Chairman of the committee responsible, expressing the view of that committee.’;
Amendment 3 #
2007/2189(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 3
Paragraph 3 – indent 3
Amendment 3 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that Community law remains a dead letter if it is not properly applied in the Member States, including by national judges, who arethe European Community is a community based on the rule of law1, resting on the principles of separation of powers and of the necessary balance as regards exercise of institutional functions – administrative on the one hand and judicial on the other; considers, therefore, the keystone of the European Union judicial systemat national judges have a central and indispensable role to play in the establishment of a single European legal order, not least in the light of the recent decisions by the Community legislature2 to involve them more actively in, and accord them greater responsibility for, the implementation of Community law;
Amendment 4 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that languageknowledge of Community law is the main tool of practitioners of justice; considers that the current level of foreign language training for national judges limits not only possibilities for judicial cooperation on specific instruments, but also the development of mutual trust, proper use of the acte clair doctrine, and participation in exchange programmes; calls on all players involved in judicial training to give specific attention to the training of judges in foreign languages; 1 Court of Justice of the European Communities, judgment of 23 April 1986 in Case 294/83 ‘Les Verts’ v European Parliament [1986] ECR 1339 ff., paragraph 23. 2 Cf. Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1., but that proficiency in foreign languages is no less essential in order to bring about full and informed judicial cooperation between the different national legal systems and the Court of Justice proper; calls, therefore, on all players involved in judicial training to give specific attention to the training of judges in foreign languages;
Amendment 6 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that complete and up-to-date information on Community law is not available in a systematic and proper manner to many national judges, and that Community law is sometimes poorly represented in domestic official journals,not published in a clear and accessible form in domestic official journals and is not properly represented in codes, commentaries, periodicals and textbooks; calls on the Member States to renew efforts in this area;
Amendment 9 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to publishing citizens’ summaries of Community legal acts, and considers that such non-legalistic summaries would also help legal practitioners to access relevant information more quickly;
Amendment 18 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that national judges cannot adopt a passive attitude to Community law, only reacting to points raised by the parties, as appears from the Court of Justice’s case law on national courts raising Community law, as the Court of Justice’s case law has established3, national judges should no longer merely rule on exceptions or questions raised by the parties, but should also be entitled to raise such issues of their own motion2; 1 Cases C-312/93 Peterbroeck [1995] ECR I-4599, C-473/00 Cofidis [2002] ECR I-10875 and C-168/05 Mostaza Claro [2006] ECR I-10421. 2 Cases C-312/93 Peterbroeck [1995] ECR I-4599, C-473/00 Cofidis [2002] ECR I-10875 and C-168/05 Mostaza Claro [2006] ECR I-10421. 3 Cases C-312/93 Peterbroeck Van Campenhout & Cie v Belgian State [1995] ECR I-4599, C-473/00 Cofidis [2002] ECR I-10875 and C-168/05 Mostaza Claro [2006] ECR I-10421.considers in particular that constitutional courts should themselves request preliminary rulings and hence be allowed to seek the opinion of the Court of Justice on points of interpretation relating to the implications for Member States’ constitutions entailed in the Court’s own rulings;
Amendment 22 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Court of Justice to consider all possible improvements to the preliminary ruling procedure which would involve the referring judge more closely in its proceedings, including enhanced possibilities for clarifying the reference and participating in the oral procedurefor instance by requiring him to produce a reference document incorporating a detailed statement of reasons in support of the reference, which could, if the Court so stipulated, be enlarged upon by means of further explanations and details;
Amendment 23 #
2007/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 10 #
2006/2223(INI)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. The Community institutions and bodies shall be obliged to supply the Ombudsman with any information he has requested of them and give him access to the files concerned. They may refuse only on duly substantiated grounds of secrecyis paragraph is without prejudice to the application of the system of exemptions provided for in Article 4 of Regulation 1049/2001 and of the internal rules of the Council, Parliament and the Commission governing access to their own documents.