2015/2087(INL) Limitation periods for traffic accidents
Lead committee dossier:
Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | JURI |
SVOBODA Pavel ( PPE)
|
DELVAUX Mady ( S&D),
DZHAMBAZKI Angel ( ECR),
CAVADA Jean-Marie ( ALDE),
ANDERSSON Max ( Verts/ALE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 47
Legal Basis:
RoP 47Subjects
Events
2017/10/06
EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2017/07/04
EP - Results of vote in Parliament
Documents
2017/07/04
EP - Decision by Parliament
Details
The European Parliament adopted by 558 votes to 69, with 73 abstentions, a resolution with recommendations to the Commission on limitation periods for traffic accidents.
Limitation periods constitute an important and integral part of Member States’ civil liability regimes which operate in traffic accident cases in that a short limitation period may balance a strict liability rule or generous damages awards.
Currently, two parallel regimes govern the law applicable in traffic accident cases depending on the country where the claim is brought, namely either the 1971 Hague Traffic Accident Convention or the Rome II Regulation , which combined with the choice of forum possibilities under Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, creates legal uncertainty and complexity as well as potential opportunities for forum shopping
Divergences of rules : the significant difference between Member States’ rules in respect of limitation periods for cross-border road traffic accidents creates further obstacles for victims when filing claims for compensation for personal injury and damage to property suffered in Member States other than their own.
Given the current situation, Members called for a level of harmonisation to ensure an adequate degree of certainty, predictability and simplicity in the application of Member States’ rules of limitation in cases of cross-border traffic accidents.
Legislative proposal requested : Parliament called on the Commission to submit on the basis of Article 81(2) TFEU, a proposal for an act on limitation periods in respect of personal injury and damage to property in cross-border road traffic accidents.
The proposed Directive, without substituting national civil liability regimes in their entirety, shall establish a special limitation regime for cross-border cases that would safeguard effective access to justice and facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market, eliminating obstacles to the free movement of citizens throughout the territory of the Member States.
Period of limitation : under the proposal, Member States shall ensure that a limitation period of at least four years shall apply to actions relating to compensation for personal injury and damage to property resulting from a cross-border road traffic accident, falling within the Directive.
Member States shall ensure that where the proper law of the claim provides for a limitation period which is longer than four years, such longer limitation period shall apply.
The proposal provides that the running of the general time limit established in the Directive should be suspended as soon as a claim is made to the insurer or the compensation body, to allow the claimant an opportunity to negotiate the settlement of the claim.
It also contains provisions on the calculation of periods of time .
General information on rules of limitation : Member States shall provide the Commission with up-to-date information on national rules of limitation for compensation claims on damages caused by road accidents. The Commission shall make publicly available this information and in all Union languages.
Documents
2017/07/04
EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2017/06/01
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details
The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the report by Pavel SVOBODA (EPP, CZ) with recommendations to the Commission on limitation periods for traffic accidents (Initiative – Rule 46 of the Rules of Procedure).
Limitation periods constitute an important and integral part of Member States’ civil liability regimes which operate in traffic accident cases in that a short limitation period may balance a strict liability rule or generous damages awards.
Divergent rules : given the current divergences in relation to limitation rules and the types of problems that are directly related to the disparate national provisions governing transnational personal injury and damage to property cases, Members called for a certain level of harmonisation is the only way to ensure an adequate degree of certainty, predictability and simplicity in the application of Member States’ rules of limitation in cases of cross-border traffic accidents.
Legislative proposal requested : Members called on the Commission to submit on the basis of Article 81(2) TFEU, a proposal for an act on limitation periods in respect of personal injury and damage to property in cross-border road traffic accidents.
The proposed Directive shall establish a special limitation regime for cross-border cases that would safeguard effective access to justice and facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market, eliminating obstacles to the free movement of citizens throughout the territory of the Member States.
Period of limitation : under the proposal, Member States shall ensure that a limitation period of at least four years shall apply to actions relating to compensation for personal injury and damage to property resulting from a cross-border road traffic accident, falling within the Directive.
The proposal provides that the running of the general time limit established in the Directive should be suspended as soon as a claim is made to the insurer or the compensation body, to allow the claimant an opportunity to negotiate the settlement of the claim.
It also contains provisions on the calculation of periods of time .
General information on rules of limitation : Member States shall provide the Commission with up-to-date information on national rules of limitation for compensation claims on damages caused by road accidents. The Commission shall make publicly available this information and in all Union languages.
Documents
2017/05/30
EP - Vote in committee
2017/04/18
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2017/03/06
EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/06/30
EP - SVOBODA Pavel (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2015/04/30
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)540
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0281/2017
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0206/2017
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE603.043
- Committee draft report: PE599.836
- Committee draft report: PE599.836
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE603.043
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)540
Activities
- Pavel SVOBODA
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0206/2017 - Pavel Svoboda - Vote unique 04/07/2017 12:39:41.000 #
2017/07/04 Outcome: +: 558, 0: 73, -: 69
GUE/NGL
NI
EFDD
ENF| Amendments | Dossier |
| 16 |
2015/2087(INL)
2017/04/18
JURI
16 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas in the Union, limitation rules on claims for damages vary widely between the Member States, so that no two Member States operate exactly the same basic rules of limitation; whereas also the relevant limitation is determined on the basis of various factors, including whether there are related criminal proceedings and whether the claim is considered tortious or contractual;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to ensure
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Also calls on the Commission to
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 1 1. In the European Union, enforcement of law before courts remains largely the matter of national procedural rules and practice. National courts are also Union courts. It is therefore for the proceedings before them to ensure fairness, justice and efficiency as well as effective application of Union law, guaranteeing that European citizens’ rights are protected throughout the European Union.
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – recital 5 (5) The requirement of legal certainty and the need to do justice in individual cases are essential elements of an area of justice. Common limitation periods increasing legal certainty, ensuring that disputes are ended and contributing to an effective enforcement regime are therefore necessary to guarantee the application of that principle.
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – recital 10 (10) In the field of road traffic accidents, it can be very difficult for a visiting victim to get basic information about the accident from the foreign jurisdiction within a relatively short time, such as the identity of the defendant and liabilities potentially involved. It may also take considerable time to identify which claims representative or insurer should deal with the case, to collect evidence about the accident and to have any necessary documents translated.
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – recital 11 (11) It is not uncommon in cross-border road traffic cases for the claimant to be very close to the expiration of a time limit before negotiations can be started with the defendant. This happens most often when the overall time limit is particularly short or when there is ambiguity about the way in which the limitation period can be suspended or interrupted. The gathering of information about an accident, which occurred in a country foreign to the claimant can take considerable time. Therefore, the running of the general time limit established in the Directive should be suspended as soon as a claim is made to the insurer or the compensation body, to allow the claimant an opportunity to negotiate the settlement of the claim.
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – recital 14 (14) This Directive seeks to promote the fundamental rights, and takes into account the principles
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas national limitation systems are thus highly complex and it can often be challenging to understand which is the applicable overall limitation, when and how limitations begin to run and how these are suspended, interrupted or extended;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas unfamiliarity with foreign rules of limitation can lead to the loss of the right to make an otherwise valid claim, or to obstacles for the victims with regard to accessing justice, in the form of additional costs and delays;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas in the area of cross-border traffic accidents, the only cause of action already harmonised at Union level is the one established in Article 18 of the Motor Insurance Directive, enabling victims to seek compensation in their own country of residence by way of a claim for compensation brought directly against a relevant insurance undertaking or against a relevant compensation body against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles10; __________________ 10See also: judgment of 13 December 2007, FBTO Schadeverzekeringen NV v Jack Odenbreit, C-463/06, ECLI:EU:C:2007:792.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas limitation periods for claims are essential to ensuring legal certainty and the finality of disputes; whereas, however, the defendant’s rights to legal certainty and finality of disputes should be balanced with the claimant’s fundamental rights to access to justice and to an effective remedy, and unnecessarily short limitation periods could obstruct effective access to justice across the EU;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas, given the current divergences in relation to limitation rules and the types of problems that are directly related to the disparate national provisions governing trans-national personal injury and damage to property cases, a certain level of harmonisation
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Notes however, that the continued existence in the Union of two parallel regimes governing the law applicable in traffic accident cases depending on the country where the claim is brought, namely either the 1971 Hague Traffic Accident Convention or the Rome II Regulation, which combined with the choice of forum possibilities under the Brussels I recast Regulation, creates legal uncertainty and complexity as well as potential opportunities for inappropriate forum shopping; stresses that the weaker party should always be protected by more favourable jurisdiction rules;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4а. Notes that the existence of common minimum rules in respect of limitation periods in cross-border disputes is essential to ensuring that effective legal means are available for the protection of victims of cross-border road traffic accidents and to guaranteeing legal certainty;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5а. Highlights that the significant difference between Member States’ rules in respect of limitation periods for cross- border road traffic accidents creates further obstacles for victims when filing claims for compensation for personal injury and damage to property suffered in Member States other than their own;
source: 603.043
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2021-12-18Show (11) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE599.836New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-599836_EN.html |
| docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE603.043New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AM-603043_EN.html |
| events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/2 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/4 |
|
| events/4 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
| procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
2020-01-19Show (5) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| docs/2/body |
EC
|
| events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2017-0206&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2017-0206_EN.html |
| events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2017-0281New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0281_EN.html |
2019-07-06Show (13) Changes | Timetravel
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
JURI/8/03333New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 47
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 046
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
2017-07-07Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/3/docs |
|
| activities/3/type |
Old
Vote scheduledNew
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
2017-07-06Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/3/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
2017-07-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/3/date |
Old
2017-07-06T00:00:00New
2017-07-04T00:00:00 |
2017-06-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2/docs/0/text |
|
2017-06-23Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2/docs |
|
2017-06-17Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/4/date |
Old
2017-07-03T00:00:00New
2017-07-06T00:00:00 |
| activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
2017-06-03Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
2017-06-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
2017-03-19Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| other/0/dg |
Old
JusticeNew
|
2017-03-16Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/date |
Old
2017-06-12T00:00:00New
2017-07-03T00:00:00 |
2017-03-02Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
2017-03-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
2017-01-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| other/0/dg |
Old
New
Justice |
2016-12-11Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
2015-10-28Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
2015-10-21Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
2015-07-24Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/date |
2015-06-30T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows |
|
| committees/0/date |
2015-06-30T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2015-05-13Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| procedure/subtype |
Old
Legislative initiativeNew
Request for legislative proposal |
2015-05-09Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| other/0 |
|
2015-05-07Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
JURI/8/03333
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2015-05-05Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|