2016/0060(CNS) | [ParlTrack]

download json

2016/0060(CNS) Jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of property consequences of registered partnerships

Progress: Procedure completed

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Lead	JURI	CAVADA Jean-Marie ( ALDE)	VOSS Axel ( PPE), GEBHARDT Evelyne ( S&D), DZHAMBAZKI Angel ( ECR), HAUTALA Heidi ( Verts/ALE)
Committee Opinion	FEMM
Committee Opinion	LIBE

Lead committee dossier:

JURI/8/05947

Legal Basis:

TFEU 081-p3-a1

Subjects

Events

2016/07/08

Final act published in Official Journal

Details

PURPOSE: to provide for a set of rules applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships in order to provide unmarried couples with legal certainty as to their property and offer them a degree of predictability.

LEGISLATIVE ACT: Council Decision (EU) 2016/1104 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

CONTENT : the Regulation applies to those Member States participating in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships, by virtue of Council Decision (EU) 2016/954 .

This Regulation is closely linked to another Regulation concerning jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial regimes.

Scope: the Regulation brings together provisions on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition or, as the case may be, acceptance, enforceability and enforcement of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements.

‘Registered partnership’ may be understood as the regime governing the shared life of two people which is provided for in law, the registration of which is mandatory under that law and which fulfils the legal formalities required by that law for its creation. The specific meaning of the term remains defined by the national law of Member States.

The scope of the Regulation includes all civil-law aspects of the property consequences of registered partnerships, both the daily management of the partner's property and its liquidation, in particular as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners.

However, excluded from the scope of the Regulation are questions concerning the legal capacity of spouses, the existence, validity or recognition of a marriage, maintenance obligations and the succession to the estate of a deceased spouse.

The Regulation does not affect the competence of the authorities of the Member States to deal with matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships

Jurisdiction: to reflect the increasing mobility of couples, the rules on jurisdiction set out in in the Regulation enable citizens to have their various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State. The Regulation provides the following:

· where a court of a Member State is seised in matters of the succession of a registered partner under Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 , the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the property consequences of the registered partnership arising in connection with that succession case;

· where a court of a Member State is seised to rule on the dissolution or annulment of a registered partnership , the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction to rule on the property consequences of the registered partnership arising in connection with that case of dissolution or annulment, where the partners so agree.

In order to increase legal certainty, predictability and the autonomy of the parties, the Regulation enables the parties, under certain circumstances, to conclude a choice of court agreement in favour of the courts of the Member State of the applicable law or of the courts of the Member State under whose law the registered partnership was created. Where a Member State holds that the registered partnership in question cannot be recognised, the courts must act swiftly and the party concerned may submit the case in any other Member State that has a connecting factor. The Regulation does not prevent the parties from settling the case amicably out of court , for instance before a notary, in a Member State of their choice.

Applicable law: following the principle of unity of the applicable law, the Regulation stipulates that the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships applies to all assets falling under those consequences, regardless of where the assets are located. The law designated as applicable by the Regulation shall be applied whether or not it is the law of a Member State.

The spouses may agree to designate, or to change, the law applicable to the property consequences of their registered partnership, provided that that law is one of the following:

· the law of the State where the spouses or future spouses, or one of them, is habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded; or

· the law of a State of nationality of either spouse or future spouse at the time the agreement is concluded;

· the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created.

In the absence of a choice-of-law agreement, the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships shall be the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created .

By way of exception, one partner may ask for a decision that the law of a State other than the State whose law is applicable if that applicant can demonstrate that the partners had their last common habitual residence in that other State for a significantly long period of time.

The Regulation sets out the issues governed by the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships, particularly the liquidation of assets and the effects of the property consequences of the registered partnership on a legal relationship between a partner and third parties.

Recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions: the Regulation lays down rules relating to the recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions similar to those of other Union instruments in the area of judicial cooperation in civil matters. Grounds for non-recognition of a decision include circumstances where such recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought.

The Regulation also allows for the acceptance and enforceability in all Member States of authentic instruments in matters related to the property consequences of registered partnerships, in certain circumstances.

Information made available to the public: Member States shall provide the Commission with a short summary of their national legislation and procedures relating to the property consequences of registered partnerships, including information on the type of authority that has competence in the matter.

ENTRY INTO FORCE: 28.7.2016. The Regulation is applicable in the Member States that participate in enhanced, as authorised by Decision (EU) 2016/954.

APPLICATION: from 29.1.2019, except with respect to certain provisions that apply from 29.4.2018, and others that apply from 29.7.2016.

Documents

Regulation 2016/1104
OJ L 183 08.07.2016, p. 0030
Corrigendum to final act 32016R1104R(01)
OJ L 113 29.04.2017, p. 0062

2016/06/24

EP/CSL - Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament

2016/06/24

EP - End of procedure in Parliament

2016/06/24

CSL - Council Meeting

2016/06/23

EP - Results of vote in Parliament

Documents

Results of vote in Parliament

2016/06/23

EP - Decision by Parliament

Details

The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 68, with 34 abstentions, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultations), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

Parliament approved the Commission proposal without amendment.

To recall, the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.

Documents

T8-0289/2016

2016/06/22

EP - Debate in Parliament

Documents

Debate in Parliament

2016/06/16

EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading

Details

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultation), the report by Jean-Marie CAVADA (ADLE, FR) on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

The committee approved the Commission proposal subject to the introduction of a new definition of ‘ Member State ’ so as to cover only Member States participating in the Registered Partnerships Regulation , in line with the definition included in Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1259/2010 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation (Rome III).

Documents

A8-0208/2016

2016/06/14

EP - Vote in committee

2016/06/10

CSL - Debate in Council

Documents

3473

2016/06/10

CSL - Council Meeting

2016/05/22

IT_SENATE - Contribution

Documents

COM(2016)0107

2016/05/16

IT_CHAMBER - Contribution

Documents

COM(2016)0107

2016/05/12

FR_ASSEMBLY - Contribution

Documents

COM(2016)0107

2016/05/09

EP - Amendments tabled in committee

Documents

PE582.312

2016/05/09

RO_SENATE - Contribution

Documents

COM(2016)0107

2016/05/08

ES_PARLIAMENT - Contribution

Documents

COM(2016)0107

2016/04/11

EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament

2016/03/30

EP - Committee draft report

Documents

PE580.493

2016/03/15

EP - CAVADA Jean-Marie (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in JURI

2016/03/02

EC - Legislative proposal published

Details

PURPOSE: to establish a clear legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

PROPOSED ACT: Council Regulation.

ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting the European Parliament but without being obliged to follow its opinion.

BACKGROUND: the increasing mobility of persons within an area without internal frontiers leads to a significant increase in the number of couples formed by nationals of different Member States who live in a Member State other than their own or acquire property in more than one Member State.

These transnational couples face practical and legal difficulties , both in the daily management of their property and in its division if the couple separate or one of its members dies.

While marriage is the most common form of couple, new forms of union have emerged, including the registered partnership , by which two people in a stable relationship formally register their union with a public authority. The difficulties encountered by couples in a registered partnership often result from the great disparities between the applicable rules governing the property effects of such unions, both in substantive law and in private international law.

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is ensured.

In the 'EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights ', adopted on 27 October 2010, the Commission announced that it would adopt in 2011 a proposal for legislation to make it easier for international couples (either married or registered partners) to know which courts had jurisdiction to deal with their property rights and which law applied to their property rights

On 16 March 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes and a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of registered partnerships. At its meeting of 3 December 2015, the Council concluded that no unanimity could be reached for the adoption of the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships and that therefore the objectives of cooperation in this area could not be attained within a reasonable period by the Union as a whole.

17 Member States addressed a request to the Commission indicating that they wished to establish enhanced cooperation.

The proposal for a Council Decision authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships.

This proposal for a Council Regulation on the property consequences of registered partnerships , and the parallel proposal for a Council Regulation on matrimonial property regimes both of which implement the enhanced cooperation and were adopted by the Commission at the same time, are the Commission's response to the request by 17 Member States.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: before the 2011 Commission proposal was drawn up, a broad consultation exercise took place with the Member States, other Union institutions and the public. The Commission conducted a joint impact study on the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships.

The two new proposals regarding matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships contain solutions similar to those presented in the 2011 proposals taking into account the discussions in the Council and the European Parliament up to the end of 2015.

CONTENT: the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.

Scope and definitions : according to the proposal, the notion of 'the property consequences of registered partnerships' must be given an autonomous interpretation and embrace considerations relating to both the partners' daily management of their property and the liquidation of the property as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners.

Matters already covered by existing EU regulations, such as maintenance obligations, especially between partners, and matters arising from the law of succession, are excluded from the scope of the Regulation.

The Regulation does not affect the existence or validity of a registered partnership under national law or the recognition in one Member State of a partnership registered in another Member State. It also does not affect matters of social security or the entitlement to rights to pension in case of dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership.

The property consequences of registered partnerships, which are the sole subject matter of this Regulation, are given a specific definition limiting them to existing property relationships between the partners and between the partners and third parties arising from the institutionalised relationship created by the registration of the partnership.

Jurisdiction : the aim of this Regulation is to enable citizens to have the various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State. To this end, the proposal is designed to ensure that the rules to determine the jurisdiction of the courts called on to deal with the property aspects of registered partnerships are in line with existing rules in other Union instruments and, in particular, to concentrate jurisdiction over the property regime in the Member State whose courts are handling the succession of a partner or the dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership.

To ensure that, in the event of the death of one of the spouses, the competent court can handle both the succession of the deceased spouse and the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime, this article provides that the court having jurisdiction for the succession according to the rules laid down in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 should also have jurisdiction to rule on the liquidation of the property regime of the registered partnership linked to the succession.

Applicable law : the option proposed in the Regulation is that of a single scheme: all the property of the partners, regardless of its nature (moveable or immoveable) and location, would be subject to the same law, namely the law applicable to the property regime of the registered partnership.

The partners or future partners may agree to designate or to change the law applicable to the property consequences of their registered partnership, provided that that law attaches property consequences to the institution of the registered partnership and that it is one of the following:

the law of the State where the partners or future partners, or one of them, is habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded, the law of a State of nationality of either partner or future partner at the time the agreement is concluded, or the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created.

In the absence of any agreement, the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships shall be the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created. However, exceptionally , one of the partners can ask a court that the law applicable should be the law of the State where the partners had their last common habitual residence

The Regulation lists some of the matters that would be governed by the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime. Such matters include the liquidation of the property and also the effects of the matrimonial property regime on the relationships between a spouse and a third party.

To protect the family home , a Member State where the family home is located may apply its own rules for the protection of the family home. Exceptionally, this Member State may apply its own law to all persons living on its territory in 'preference' to the law normally applicable or that of a marriage agreement concluded in another Member State.

Recognition, enforceability and enforcement : the proposal provides for the free circulation of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements concerning matrimonial property regimes. It would thus introduce mutual recognition based on the mutual trust arising out of the integration of the Member States within the Union.

This free circulation would take the form of a uniform procedure for the recognition and enforcement of decisions, authentic acts and legal transactions originating in another Member State. The grounds for non-recognition or refusal to enforce are also harmonised at Union level or reduced to the absolute minimum.

Documents

COM(2016)0107
EUR-Lex

Documents

Final act published in Official Journal: Regulation 2016/1104
Final act published in Official Journal: OJ L 183 08.07.2016, p. 0030
Final act published in Official Journal: Corrigendum to final act 32016R1104R(01)
Final act published in Official Journal: OJ L 113 29.04.2017, p. 0062
Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
Decision by Parliament: T8-0289/2016
Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A8-0208/2016
Debate in Council: 3473
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Amendments tabled in committee: PE582.312
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Committee draft report: PE580.493
Legislative proposal published: COM(2016)0107
Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
Committee draft report: PE580.493
Amendments tabled in committee: PE582.312
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107
Contribution: COM(2016)0107

Activities

Votes

A8-0208/2016 - Jean-Marie Cavada - Résolution législative #

2016/06/23 Outcome: +: 490, -: 68, 0: 34

		DE	IT	ES	RO	FR	BE	PT	CZ	AT	HU	SE	BG	NL	IE	LT	DK	EL	FI	MT	SI	CY	PL	LU	HR	GB	LV	EE	SK
	Total	81	64	43	28	64	20	19	20	17	17	16	14	23	10	9	12	21	10	6	5	6	41	4	9	13	3	3	13
PPE	183	Germany PPE For (30) Albert DESS, Angelika NIEBLER, Axel VOSS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Burkhard BALZ, Christian EHLER, David MCALLISTER, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Elmar BROK, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Herbert REUL, Hermann WINKLER, Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Jens GIESEKE, Joachim ZELLER, Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, Manfred WEBER, Markus FERBER, Markus PIEPER, Michael GAHLER, Monika HOHLMEIER, Norbert LINS, Peter JAHR, Peter LIESE, Rainer WIELAND, Reimer BÖGE, Sabine VERHEYEN, Sven SCHULZE, Thomas MANN, Werner LANGEN Against (1) Daniel CASPARY Abstain (1) Werner KUHN 32	Italy PPE For (10) Alberto CIRIO, Aldo PATRICIELLO, Antonio TAJANI, Elisabetta GARDINI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Giovanni LA VIA, Herbert DORFMANN, Lorenzo CESA, Salvatore Domenico POGLIESE, Stefano MAULLU Abstain (1) Massimiliano SALINI 11	Spain PPE For (12) Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA, Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE, Carlos ITURGAIZ, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Gabriel MATO, Pablo ZALBA BIDEGAIN, Pilar AYUSO, Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ 12	Romania PPE For (10) Adina VĂLEAN, Cristian Dan PREDA, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Csaba SÓGOR, Iuliu WINKLER, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Mihai ŢURCANU, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Theodor Dumitru STOLOJAN, Traian UNGUREANU Abstain (1) Daniel BUDA 11	France PPE For (19) Alain CADEC, Alain LAMASSOURE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Brice HORTEFEUX, Constance LE GRIP, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Franck PROUST, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Maurice PONGA, Michel DANTIN, Michèle ALLIOT-MARIE, Nadine MORANO, Philippe JUVIN, Rachida DATI, Renaud MUSELIER, Tokia SAÏFI 19	Belgium PPE For (3) Claude ROLIN, Ivo BELET, Pascal ARIMONT 3	Portugal PPE For (7) Carlos COELHO, Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR, Fernando RUAS, José Manuel FERNANDES, Nuno MELO, Paulo RANGEL, Sofia RIBEIRO 7	Czechia PPE For (6) Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, Pavel SVOBODA, Stanislav POLČÁK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Abstain (1) Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ 7	Austria PPE For (4) Claudia SCHMIDT, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Heinz K. BECKER, Othmar KARAS 4	Hungary PPE For (10) Andor DELI, Andrea BOCSKOR, György HÖLVÉNYI, György SCHÖPFLIN, Ildikó GÁLL-PELCZ, József SZÁJER, Kinga GÁL, László TŐKÉS, Norbert ERDŐS, Ádám KÓSA 10	Sweden PPE For (3) Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Gunnar HÖKMARK, Lars ADAKTUSSON 3	Bulgaria PPE For (7) Andrey KOVATCHEV, Andrey NOVAKOV, Emil RADEV, Eva MAYDELL, Mariya GABRIEL, Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV, Vladimir URUTCHEV 7	Netherlands PPE For (4) Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Esther DE LANGE, Jeroen LENAERS, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ 4	Ireland PPE For (4) Brian HAYES, Deirdre CLUNE, Mairead McGUINNESS, Seán KELLY 4	Lithuania PPE For (2) Algirdas SAUDARGAS, Laima Liucija ANDRIKIENĖ 2	Denmark PPE For (1) Bendt BENDTSEN 1	Greece PPE For (5) Elissavet VOZEMBERG-VRIONIDI, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Georgios KYRTSOS, Maria SPYRAKI, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS 5	Finland PPE For (2) Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN 2	Malta PPE For (3) David CASA, Roberta METSOLA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA 3	Slovenia PPE For (3) Milan ZVER, Patricija ŠULIN, Romana TOMC 3	Cyprus PPE For (1) Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU 1	Poland PPE For (20) Adam SZEJNFELD, Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA, Barbara KUDRYCKA, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Dariusz ROSATI, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI, Jan OLBRYCHT, Janusz LEWANDOWSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Jerzy BUZEK, Julia PITERA, Krzysztof HETMAN, Marek PLURA, Róża THUN UND HOHENSTEIN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA 20	Luxembourg PPE For (1) Georges BACH 1	Croatia PPE For (1) Dubravka ŠUICA Against (2) Davor Ivo STIER, Marijana PETIR 3		Latvia PPE For (1) Sandra KALNIETE 1	Estonia PPE Against (1) Tunne KELAM 1	Slovakia PPE For (1) József NAGY Against (4) Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Miroslav MIKOLÁŠIK, Pál CSÁKY Abstain (1) Eduard KUKAN 6
S&D	144	Germany S&D For (21) Arne LIETZ, Bernd LANGE, Constanze KREHL, Dietmar KÖSTER, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Gabriele PREUSS, Ismail ERTUG, Jakob von WEIZSÄCKER, Jens GEIER, Jo LEINEN, Joachim SCHUSTER, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Knut FLECKENSTEIN, Matthias GROOTE, Norbert NEUSER, Peter SIMON, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Susanne MELIOR, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Udo BULLMANN, Ulrike RODUST 21	Italy S&D For (28) Alessia Maria MOSCA, Brando BENIFEI, Caterina CHINNICI, Cécile Kashetu KYENGE, Damiano ZOFFOLI, Daniele VIOTTI, David Maria SASSOLI, Elena GENTILE, Elly SCHLEIN, Enrico GASBARRA, Flavio ZANONATO, Gianni PITTELLA, Goffredo Maria BETTINI, Isabella DE MONTE, Luigi MORGANO, Massimo PAOLUCCI, Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Nicola CAPUTO, Nicola DANTI, Paolo DE CASTRO, Patrizia TOIA, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Pina PICIERNO, Renata BRIANO, Roberto GUALTIERI, Silvia COSTA, Simona BONAFÈ 28	Spain S&D For (10) Clara AGUILERA, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Elena VALENCIANO, Enrique GUERRERO SALOM, Inma RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO, Inés AYALA SENDER, Iratxe GARCÍA PÉREZ, José BLANCO LÓPEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ 10	Romania S&D For (13) Andi CRISTEA, Claudia ȚAPARDEL, Claudiu Ciprian TĂNĂSESCU, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Daciana Octavia SÂRBU, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Emilian PAVEL, Ioan Mircea PAŞCU, Maria GRAPINI, Sorin MOISĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU, Victor NEGRESCU, Viorica DĂNCILĂ 13	France S&D For (12) Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Edouard MARTIN, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eric ANDRIEU, Gilles PARGNEAUX, Guillaume BALAS, Isabelle THOMAS, Jean-Paul DENANOT, Pervenche BERÈS, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Vincent PEILLON, Virginie ROZIÈRE 12	Belgium S&D For (4) Hugues BAYET, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Marc TARABELLA, Maria ARENA 4	Portugal S&D For (7) Ana GOMES, Carlos ZORRINHO, Francisco ASSIS, Liliana RODRIGUES, Maria João RODRIGUES, Pedro SILVA PEREIRA, Ricardo SERRÃO SANTOS 7	Czechia S&D For (4) Jan KELLER, Miroslav POCHE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Pavel POC 4	Austria S&D For (5) Eugen FREUND, Evelyn REGNER, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Karin KADENBACH, Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ 5	Hungary S&D For (4) Csaba MOLNÁR, István UJHELYI, Péter NIEDERMÜLLER, Tibor SZANYI 4	Sweden S&D For (4) Anna HEDH, Jens NILSSON, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Soraya POST 4	Bulgaria S&D For (1) Iliana IOTOVA 1	Netherlands S&D For (3) Agnes JONGERIUS, Kati PIRI, Paul TANG 3	Ireland S&D For (1) Nessa CHILDERS 1	Lithuania S&D For (1) Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ 1	Denmark S&D For (3) Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Jeppe KOFOD, Ole CHRISTENSEN 3	Greece S&D For (4) Eva KAILI, Giorgos GRAMMATIKAKIS, Miltiadis KYRKOS, Nikos ANDROULAKIS 4	Finland S&D For (1) Liisa JAAKONSAARI 1	Malta S&D For (3) Alfred SANT, Marlene MIZZI, Miriam DALLI 3		Cyprus S&D For (2) Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS 2	Poland S&D For (3) Adam GIEREK, Janusz ZEMKE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG 3	Luxembourg S&D For (1) Mady DELVAUX 1	Croatia S&D For (2) Biljana BORZAN, Tonino PICULA 2	United Kingdom S&D For (2) David MARTIN, Lucy ANDERSON 2	Latvia S&D For (1) Andrejs MAMIKINS 1		Slovakia S&D For (4) Boris ZALA, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Vladimír MAŇKA 4
ALDE	61	Germany ALDE For (4) Alexander Graf LAMBSDORFF, Gesine MEISSNER, Michael THEURER, Ulrike MÜLLER 4		Spain ALDE For (6) Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Carolina PUNSET, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, María Teresa GIMÉNEZ BARBAT, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS 6	Romania ALDE For (3) Mircea DIACONU, Norica NICOLAI, Renate WEBER 3	France ALDE For (7) Dominique RIQUET, Jean ARTHUIS, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Marielle DE SARNEZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Robert ROCHEFORT, Sylvie GOULARD 7	Belgium ALDE For (6) Frédérique RIES, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Gérard DEPREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS, Lieve WIERINCK, Louis MICHEL 6	Portugal ALDE For (2) António MARINHO E PINTO, José Inácio FARIA 2	Czechia ALDE For (4) Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Martina DLABAJOVÁ, Pavel TELIČKA, Petr JEŽEK 4	Austria ALDE For (1) Angelika MLINAR 1		Sweden ALDE For (2) Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jasenko SELIMOVIC 2	Bulgaria ALDE For (4) Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Ilhan KYUCHYUK, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Nedzhmi ALI 4	Netherlands ALDE For (6) Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Jan HUITEMA, Marietje SCHAAKE, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Sophia IN 'T VELD 6	Ireland ALDE For (1) Marian HARKIN 1	Lithuania ALDE For (4) Antanas GUOGA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Valentinas MAZURONIS, Viktor USPASKICH 4	Denmark ALDE For (3) Jens ROHDE, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Morten PETERSEN 3		Finland ALDE For (2) Nils TORVALDS, Paavo VÄYRYNEN Abstain (1) Hannu TAKKULA 3		Slovenia ALDE For (1) Ivo VAJGL 1			Luxembourg ALDE For (1) Charles GOERENS 1	Croatia ALDE For (2) Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Jozo RADOŠ 2			Estonia ALDE For (1) Jana TOOM 1
GUE/NGL	44	Germany GUE/NGL For (6) Cornelia ERNST, Gabriele ZIMMER, Helmut SCHOLZ, Martina MICHELS, Sabine LÖSING, Stefan ECK 6	Italy GUE/NGL For (3) Barbara SPINELLI, Curzio MALTESE, Eleonora FORENZA 3	Spain GUE/NGL For (11) Estefanía TORRES MARTÍNEZ, Javier COUSO PERMUY, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ, Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY, Maria Lidia SENRA RODRÍGUEZ, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Miguel URBÁN CRESPO, Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS, Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA, Ángela VALLINA 11		France GUE/NGL For (1) Younous OMARJEE 1		Portugal GUE/NGL For (3) João FERREIRA, João PIMENTA LOPES, Marisa MATIAS 3	Czechia GUE/NGL For (2) Jaromír KOHLÍČEK, Kateřina KONEČNÁ 2			Sweden GUE/NGL For (1) Malin BJÖRK 1		Netherlands GUE/NGL For (3) Anja HAZEKAMP, Anne-Marie MINEUR, Dennis de JONG 3	Ireland GUE/NGL For (4) Liadh NÍ RIADA, Luke Ming FLANAGAN, Lynn BOYLAN, Matt CARTHY 4			Greece GUE/NGL For (6) Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Stelios KOULOGLOU 6	Finland GUE/NGL For (1) Merja KYLLÖNEN 1			Cyprus GUE/NGL For (2) Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU 2				United Kingdom GUE/NGL For (1) Martina ANDERSON 1
Verts/ALE	41	Germany Verts/ALE For (11) Barbara LOCHBIHLER, Felix REDA, Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Maria HEUBUCH, Martin HÄUSLING, Michael CRAMER, Rebecca HARMS, Reinhard BÜTIKOFER, Ska KELLER, Sven GIEGOLD, Terry REINTKE Abstain (1) Klaus BUCHNER 12		Spain Verts/ALE For (4) Ernest MARAGALL, Ernest URTASUN, Jordi Vicent SEBASTIA TALAVERA, Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS 4		France Verts/ALE For (5) José BOVÉ, Karima DELLI, Michèle RIVASI, Pascal DURAND, Yannick JADOT 5	Belgium Verts/ALE For (2) Bart STAES, Philippe LAMBERTS 2			Austria Verts/ALE For (3) Michel REIMON, Monika VANA, Ulrike LUNACEK 3	Hungary Verts/ALE For (1) Benedek JÁVOR 1	Sweden Verts/ALE For (4) Bodil VALERO, Jakop G. DALUNDE, Linnéa ENGSTRÖM, Max ANDERSSON 4		Netherlands Verts/ALE For (1) Bas EICKHOUT 1		Lithuania Verts/ALE For (1) Bronis ROPĖ 1	Denmark Verts/ALE For (1) Margrete AUKEN 1		Finland Verts/ALE For (1) Heidi HAUTALA 1		Slovenia Verts/ALE For (1) Igor ŠOLTES 1			Luxembourg Verts/ALE For (1) Claude TURMES 1	Croatia Verts/ALE For (1) Davor ŠKRLEC 1	United Kingdom Verts/ALE For (1) Keith TAYLOR 1	Latvia Verts/ALE For (1) Tatjana ŽDANOKA 1	Estonia Verts/ALE For (1) Indrek TARAND 1
EFDD	23	Germany EFDD Against (1) Beatrix von STORCH 1	Italy EFDD For (16) Daniela AIUTO, Dario TAMBURRANO, David BORRELLI, Eleonora EVI, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Giulia MOI, Ignazio CORRAO, Isabella ADINOLFI, Laura AGEA, Laura FERRARA, Marco VALLI, Marco ZANNI, Marco ZULLO, Piernicola PEDICINI, Rosa D'AMATO, Tiziana BEGHIN 16						Czechia EFDD Abstain (1) Petr MACH 1			Sweden EFDD Against (2) Kristina WINBERG, Peter LUNDGREN 2				Lithuania EFDD For (1) Rolandas PAKSAS 1							Poland EFDD Against (1) Robert Jarosław IWASZKIEWICZ 1			United Kingdom EFDD Against (1) Jonathan ARNOTT 1
NI	11	Germany NI For (1) Martin SONNEBORN 1				France NI Against (2) Aymeric CHAUPRADE, Bruno GOLLNISCH 2					Hungary NI Against (2) Béla KOVÁCS, Zoltán BALCZÓ 2							Greece NI Against (5) Eleftherios SYNADINOS, Georgios EPITIDEIOS, Kostas PAPADAKIS, Lampros FOUNTOULIS, Sotirios ZARIANOPOULOS 5					Poland NI Against (1) Janusz KORWIN-MIKKE 1
ECR	51	Germany ECR Against (1) Arne GERICKE Abstain (2) Bernd LUCKE, Joachim STARBATTY 3	Italy ECR Abstain (2) Raffaele FITTO, Remo SERNAGIOTTO 2		Romania ECR For (1) Monica MACOVEI 1		Belgium ECR For (4) Anneleen VAN BOSSUYT, Helga STEVENS, Mark DEMESMAEKER, Sander LOONES 4		Czechia ECR For (2) Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Jan ZAHRADIL 2				Bulgaria ECR Against (1) Angel DZHAMBAZKI Abstain (1) Nikolay BAREKOV 2	Netherlands ECR Against (2) Bas BELDER, Peter van DALEN 2			Denmark ECR For (1) Rikke-Louise KARLSSON Abstain (3) Anders VISTISEN, Jørn DOHRMANN, Morten MESSERSCHMIDT 4	Greece ECR Against (1) Notis MARIAS 1	Finland ECR Abstain (2) Jussi HALLA-AHO, Pirkko RUOHONEN-LERNER 2			Cyprus ECR Abstain (1) Eleni THEOCHAROUS 1	Poland ECR Against (15) Anna FOTYGA, Beata GOSIEWSKA, Bolesław G. PIECHA, Czesław HOC, Edward CZESAK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA, Karol KARSKI, Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI, Mirosław PIOTROWSKI, Ryszard Antoni LEGUTKO, Stanisław OŻÓG, Sławomir KŁOSOWSKI, Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI 15		Croatia ECR Abstain (1) Ruža TOMAŠIĆ 1	United Kingdom ECR Abstain (8) Ashley FOX, Daniel DALTON, Emma McCLARKIN, James NICHOLSON, Kay SWINBURNE, Nirj DEVA, Richard ASHWORTH, Syed KAMALL 8			Slovakia ECR For (1) Richard SULÍK Against (1) Branislav ŠKRIPEK Abstain (1) Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ 3
ENF	33	Germany ENF Against (1) Marcus PRETZELL 1	Italy ENF Abstain (4) Lorenzo FONTANA, Mara BIZZOTTO, Mario BORGHEZIO, Matteo SALVINI 4			France ENF Against (18) Bernard MONOT, Dominique BILDE, Dominique MARTIN, Edouard FERRAND, Gilles LEBRETON, Jean-François JALKH, Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER, Louis ALIOT, Marie-Christine ARNAUTU, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET, Marine LE PEN, Mireille D'ORNANO, Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI, Nicolas BAY, Philippe LOISEAU, Sophie MONTEL, Steeve BRIOIS, Sylvie GODDYN 18	Belgium ENF Abstain (1) Gerolf ANNEMANS 1			Austria ENF For (4) Barbara KAPPEL, Franz OBERMAYR, Georg MAYER, Harald VILIMSKY 4				Netherlands ENF Against (4) Auke ZIJLSTRA, Marcel de GRAAFF, Olaf STUGER, Vicky MAEIJER 4									Poland ENF Against (1) Stanisław ŻÓŁTEK 1

Amendments	Dossier
8	2016/0060(CNS) 2016/05/09 JURI 8 amendments... Amendment 1 # Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK Proposal for a regulation Recital 19 (19) This Regulation should not apply to areas of civil law other than the property consequences of registered partnerships. For reasons of clarity, a number of questions which could be seen as having a link with the property consequences of registered partnerships should be explicitly excluded from the scope of this Regulation.deleted Amendment 2 # Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK Proposal for a regulation Recital 20 (20) Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to questions of general legal capacity of the partners; however, this exclusion should not cover the specific powers and rights of either or both partners with regard to property, either as between themselves or as regards third parties, as these powers and rights should fall under the scope of the Regulation.deleted Amendment 3 # Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK Proposal for a regulation Recital 21 (21) It should not apply to other preliminary questions such as the existence, validity or recognition of a registered partnership, which is covered by the national laws of the Member States, including their rules of private international law.deleted Amendment 4 # Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK Proposal for a regulation Recital 22 (22) As maintenance obligations between partners are governed by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations23, they should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation, as should issues relating to the succession to the estate of a deceased partner, that are covered by Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession24. __________________ 23 OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 24 OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p 107.deleted Amendment 5 # József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA Proposal for a regulation Recital 64 a (new) (64 a) This Regulation should not affect bilateral and multilateral conventions concluded prior to the entry into force of this Regulation between Member States which participate in the enhanced cooperation and non-participating Member States. Amendment 6 # József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new) (e a) ‘Member State’ means a Member State which participates in the enhanced cooperation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes, by virtue of Decision 2016/ x/EU, or by virtue of a decision adopted in accordance with the second or third subparagraph of Article 331(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; Amendment 7 # Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Arne GERICKE Proposal for a regulation Article 10 Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction under Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, or when all of the courts according to Article 9 have declined jurisdiction and no court of a Member State has jurisdiction under Article 6(e), Articles 7 and 8, the courts of a Member State shall have jurisdiction in so far as immoveable property of one or both partners are located in the territory of that Member State, but in that event the court seised shall have jurisdiction to rule only in respect of the immoveable property in question. In the framework of this regulation, mutual recognition of administrative documents cannot contradict the principle of subsidiarity; this regulation cannot urge Member States to harmonise their national family law, including matrimonial property regimes. Amendment 8 # Angel DZHAMBAZKI Proposal for a regulation Article 38 Article 38 Fundamental rights Article 37 shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in observance of the fundamental rights and principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 21 thereof on the principle of non-discrimination.deleted source: 582.312

Amendments

Dossier

2016/0060(CNS)

2016/05/09 JURI 8 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) This Regulation should not apply to areas of civil law other than the property consequences of registered partnerships. For reasons of clarity, a number of questions which could be seen as having a link with the property consequences of registered partnerships should be explicitly excluded from the scope of this Regulation.deleted

Amendment 2 #

Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to questions of general legal capacity of the partners; however, this exclusion should not cover the specific powers and rights of either or both partners with regard to property, either as between themselves or as regards third parties, as these powers and rights should fall under the scope of the Regulation.deleted

Amendment 3 #

Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) It should not apply to other preliminary questions such as the existence, validity or recognition of a registered partnership, which is covered by the national laws of the Member States, including their rules of private international law.deleted

Amendment 4 #

Arne GERICKE, Branislav ŠKRIPEK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) As maintenance obligations between partners are governed by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations23, they should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation, as should issues relating to the succession to the estate of a deceased partner, that are covered by Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession24. __________________ 23 OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 24 OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p 107.deleted

Amendment 5 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64 a (new)

(64 a) This Regulation should not affect bilateral and multilateral conventions concluded prior to the entry into force of this Regulation between Member States which participate in the enhanced cooperation and non-participating Member States.

Amendment 6 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

(e a) ‘Member State’ means a Member State which participates in the enhanced cooperation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes, by virtue of Decision 2016/ x/EU, or by virtue of a decision adopted in accordance with the second or third subparagraph of Article 331(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

Amendment 7 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Arne GERICKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10

Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction under Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, or when all of the courts according to Article 9 have declined jurisdiction and no court of a Member State has jurisdiction under Article 6(e), Articles 7 and 8, the courts of a Member State shall have jurisdiction in so far as immoveable property of one or both partners are located in the territory of that Member State, but in that event the court seised shall have jurisdiction to rule only in respect of the immoveable property in question. In the framework of this regulation, mutual recognition of administrative documents cannot contradict the principle of subsidiarity; this regulation cannot urge Member States to harmonise their national family law, including matrimonial property regimes.

Amendment 8 #

Angel DZHAMBAZKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 38

Article 38 Fundamental rights Article 37 shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in observance of the fundamental rights and principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 21 thereof on the principle of non-discrimination.deleted

source: 582.312

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2023-08-03Show (10) Changes | Timetravel

docs/2	date 2016-05-08T00:00:00 docs url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body ES_PARLIAMENT
docs/2	date 2016-05-09T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body ES_PARLIAMENT
docs/3	date 2016-05-12T00:00:00 docs url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body FR_ASSEMBLY
docs/3	date 2016-05-13T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body FR_ASSEMBLY
docs/4	date 2016-05-16T00:00:00 docs url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body IT_CHAMBER
docs/4	date 2016-05-17T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body IT_CHAMBER
docs/5	date 2016-05-22T00:00:00 docs url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body IT_SENATE
docs/5	date 2016-05-23T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body IT_SENATE
docs/6	date 2016-05-09T00:00:00 docs url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body RO_SENATE
docs/6	date 2016-05-10T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type Contribution body RO_SENATE

2021-12-18Show (9) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0/shadows/3	name MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr GUE/NGL
docs/0/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE580.493 New https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-580493_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.312 New https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AM-582312_EN.html
events/1/type	Old Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading New Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/3/type	Old Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading New Vote in committee
events/4/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0208_EN.html New https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0208_EN.html
events/5/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160622&type=CRE New https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-8-2016-06-22-TOC_EN.html
events/7	date 2016-06-23T00:00:00 type Decision by Parliament body EP docs url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0289_EN.html title: T8-0289/2016 summary The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 68, with 34 abstentions, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultations), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. Parliament approved the Commission proposal without amendment. To recall, the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.
events/7	date 2016-06-23T00:00:00 type Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body EP docs url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0289_EN.html title: T8-0289/2016 summary The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 68, with 34 abstentions, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultations), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. Parliament approved the Commission proposal without amendment. To recall, the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.

2020-01-19Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP associated False committee_full Legal Affairs committee JURI rapporteur name: CAVADA Jean-Marie date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE shadows name: VOSS Axel group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: HAUTALA Heidi group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP associated False committee_full Legal Affairs committee JURI date 2016-03-15T00:00:00 rapporteur name: CAVADA Jean-Marie group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE shadows name: VOSS Axel group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: HAUTALA Heidi group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
events/4/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0208&language=EN New http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0208_EN.html
events/7/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0289 New http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0289_EN.html

2019-07-12Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0

type: Responsible Committee

body: EP

associated: False

committee_full: Legal Affairs

committee: JURI

date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00

rapporteur: name: CAVADA Jean-Marie group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE

shadows: name: VOSS Axel group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: HAUTALA Heidi group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE

committees/0

type: Responsible Committee

body: EP

associated: False

committee_full: Legal Affairs

committee: JURI

date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00

rapporteur: name: CAVADA Jean-Marie group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE

shadows: name: VOSS Axel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: HAUTALA Heidi group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE

2019-07-06Show (16) Changes | Timetravel

activities	date: 2016-03-02T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2016/0107/COM_COM(2016)0107_EN.pdf title: COM(2016)0107 type: Legislative proposal published celexid: CELEX:52016PC0107:EN body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/ title: Justice Commissioner: JOUROVÁ Věra type: Legislative proposal published date: 2016-04-11T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE body: CSL meeting_id: 3473 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3473*&MEET_DATE=10/06/2016 type: Debate in Council title: 3473 council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) date: 2016-06-10T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting date: 2016-06-14T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0208&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A8-0208/2016 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE date: 2016-06-16T00:00:00 date: 2016-06-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160622&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament date: 2016-06-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0289 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0289/2016 body: EP type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: General Affairs meeting_id: 3478 date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body: EP type: End of procedure in Parliament date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body: EP/CSL type: Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament date: 2016-07-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104 title: Regulation 2016/1104 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2016:183:TOC title: OJ L 183 08.07.2016, p. 0030 type: Final act published in Official Journal
commission	body: EC dg: Justice and Consumers commissioner: JOUROVÁ Věra
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP associated False committee_full Legal Affairs committee JURI date 2016-03-15T00:00:00 rapporteur name: CAVADA Jean-Marie group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE shadows name: VOSS Axel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: HAUTALA Heidi group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/0	body EP responsible False committee_full Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee FEMM
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP associated False committee_full Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee LIBE opinion False
committees/1	body EP shadows group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible True committee JURI date 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full Legal Affairs rapporteur group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie
committees/2	type Committee Opinion body EP associated False committee_full Womens Rights and Gender Equality committee FEMM opinion False
committees/2	body EP responsible False committee_full Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee LIBE
council	body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: General Affairs meeting_id: 3478 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3478&MEET_DATE=24/06/2016 date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) meeting_id: 3473 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3473&MEET_DATE=10/06/2016 date: 2016-06-10T00:00:00
docs	date: 2016-03-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE580.493 title: PE580.493 type: Committee draft report body: EP date: 2016-05-09T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.312 title: PE582.312 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP date: 2016-05-09T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type: Contribution body: ES_PARLIAMENT date: 2016-05-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type: Contribution body: FR_ASSEMBLY date: 2016-05-17T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type: Contribution body: IT_CHAMBER date: 2016-05-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type: Contribution body: IT_SENATE date: 2016-05-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2016)0107 title: COM(2016)0107 type: Contribution body: RO_SENATE
events	date: 2016-03-02T00:00:00 type: Legislative proposal published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2016/0107/COM_COM(2016)0107_EN.pdf title: COM(2016)0107 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2016&nu_doc=0107 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: to establish a clear legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. PROPOSED ACT: Council Regulation. ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting the European Parliament but without being obliged to follow its opinion. BACKGROUND: the increasing mobility of persons within an area without internal frontiers leads to a significant increase in the number of couples formed by nationals of different Member States who live in a Member State other than their own or acquire property in more than one Member State. These transnational couples face practical and legal difficulties , both in the daily management of their property and in its division if the couple separate or one of its members dies. While marriage is the most common form of couple, new forms of union have emerged, including the registered partnership , by which two people in a stable relationship formally register their union with a public authority. The difficulties encountered by couples in a registered partnership often result from the great disparities between the applicable rules governing the property effects of such unions, both in substantive law and in private international law. The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is ensured. In the 'EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights ', adopted on 27 October 2010, the Commission announced that it would adopt in 2011 a proposal for legislation to make it easier for international couples (either married or registered partners) to know which courts had jurisdiction to deal with their property rights and which law applied to their property rights On 16 March 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes and a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of registered partnerships. At its meeting of 3 December 2015, the Council concluded that no unanimity could be reached for the adoption of the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships and that therefore the objectives of cooperation in this area could not be attained within a reasonable period by the Union as a whole. 17 Member States addressed a request to the Commission indicating that they wished to establish enhanced cooperation. The proposal for a Council Decision authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships. This proposal for a Council Regulation on the property consequences of registered partnerships , and the parallel proposal for a Council Regulation on matrimonial property regimes both of which implement the enhanced cooperation and were adopted by the Commission at the same time, are the Commission's response to the request by 17 Member States. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: before the 2011 Commission proposal was drawn up, a broad consultation exercise took place with the Member States, other Union institutions and the public. The Commission conducted a joint impact study on the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships. The two new proposals regarding matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships contain solutions similar to those presented in the 2011 proposals taking into account the discussions in the Council and the European Parliament up to the end of 2015. CONTENT: the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases. Scope and definitions : according to the proposal, the notion of 'the property consequences of registered partnerships' must be given an autonomous interpretation and embrace considerations relating to both the partners' daily management of their property and the liquidation of the property as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners. Matters already covered by existing EU regulations, such as maintenance obligations, especially between partners, and matters arising from the law of succession, are excluded from the scope of the Regulation. The Regulation does not affect the existence or validity of a registered partnership under national law or the recognition in one Member State of a partnership registered in another Member State. It also does not affect matters of social security or the entitlement to rights to pension in case of dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership. The property consequences of registered partnerships, which are the sole subject matter of this Regulation, are given a specific definition limiting them to existing property relationships between the partners and between the partners and third parties arising from the institutionalised relationship created by the registration of the partnership. Jurisdiction : the aim of this Regulation is to enable citizens to have the various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State. To this end, the proposal is designed to ensure that the rules to determine the jurisdiction of the courts called on to deal with the property aspects of registered partnerships are in line with existing rules in other Union instruments and, in particular, to concentrate jurisdiction over the property regime in the Member State whose courts are handling the succession of a partner or the dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership. To ensure that, in the event of the death of one of the spouses, the competent court can handle both the succession of the deceased spouse and the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime, this article provides that the court having jurisdiction for the succession according to the rules laid down in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 should also have jurisdiction to rule on the liquidation of the property regime of the registered partnership linked to the succession. Applicable law : the option proposed in the Regulation is that of a single scheme: all the property of the partners, regardless of its nature (moveable or immoveable) and location, would be subject to the same law, namely the law applicable to the property regime of the registered partnership. The partners or future partners may agree to designate or to change the law applicable to the property consequences of their registered partnership, provided that that law attaches property consequences to the institution of the registered partnership and that it is one of the following: the law of the State where the partners or future partners, or one of them, is habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded, the law of a State of nationality of either partner or future partner at the time the agreement is concluded, or the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created. In the absence of any agreement, the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships shall be the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created. However, exceptionally , one of the partners can ask a court that the law applicable should be the law of the State where the partners had their last common habitual residence The Regulation lists some of the matters that would be governed by the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime. Such matters include the liquidation of the property and also the effects of the matrimonial property regime on the relationships between a spouse and a third party. To protect the family home , a Member State where the family home is located may apply its own rules for the protection of the family home. Exceptionally, this Member State may apply its own law to all persons living on its territory in 'preference' to the law normally applicable or that of a marriage agreement concluded in another Member State. Recognition, enforceability and enforcement : the proposal provides for the free circulation of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements concerning matrimonial property regimes. It would thus introduce mutual recognition based on the mutual trust arising out of the integration of the Member States within the Union. This free circulation would take the form of a uniform procedure for the recognition and enforcement of decisions, authentic acts and legal transactions originating in another Member State. The grounds for non-recognition or refusal to enforce are also harmonised at Union level or reduced to the absolute minimum. date: 2016-04-11T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP date: 2016-06-10T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3473*&MEET_DATE=10/06/2016 title: 3473 date: 2016-06-14T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP date: 2016-06-16T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0208&language=EN title: A8-0208/2016 summary: The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultation), the report by Jean-Marie CAVADA (ADLE, FR) on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. The committee approved the Commission proposal subject to the introduction of a new definition of ‘ Member State ’ so as to cover only Member States participating in the Registered Partnerships Regulation , in line with the definition included in Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1259/2010 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation (Rome III). date: 2016-06-22T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160622&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament date: 2016-06-23T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=27398&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament date: 2016-06-23T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0289 title: T8-0289/2016 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 68, with 34 abstentions, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultations), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. Parliament approved the Commission proposal without amendment. To recall, the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases. date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 type: Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament body: EP/CSL date: 2016-06-24T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP date: 2016-07-08T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal summary: PURPOSE: to provide for a set of rules applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships in order to provide unmarried couples with legal certainty as to their property and offer them a degree of predictability. LEGISLATIVE ACT: Council Decision (EU) 2016/1104 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships. CONTENT : the Regulation applies to those Member States participating in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships, by virtue of Council Decision (EU) 2016/954 . This Regulation is closely linked to another Regulation concerning jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial regimes. Scope: the Regulation brings together provisions on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition or, as the case may be, acceptance, enforceability and enforcement of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements. ‘Registered partnership’ may be understood as the regime governing the shared life of two people which is provided for in law, the registration of which is mandatory under that law and which fulfils the legal formalities required by that law for its creation. The specific meaning of the term remains defined by the national law of Member States. The scope of the Regulation includes all civil-law aspects of the property consequences of registered partnerships, both the daily management of the partner's property and its liquidation, in particular as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners. However, excluded from the scope of the Regulation are questions concerning the legal capacity of spouses, the existence, validity or recognition of a marriage, maintenance obligations and the succession to the estate of a deceased spouse. The Regulation does not affect the competence of the authorities of the Member States to deal with matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships Jurisdiction: to reflect the increasing mobility of couples, the rules on jurisdiction set out in in the Regulation enable citizens to have their various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State. The Regulation provides the following: · where a court of a Member State is seised in matters of the succession of a registered partner under Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 , the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the property consequences of the registered partnership arising in connection with that succession case; · where a court of a Member State is seised to rule on the dissolution or annulment of a registered partnership , the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction to rule on the property consequences of the registered partnership arising in connection with that case of dissolution or annulment, where the partners so agree. In order to increase legal certainty, predictability and the autonomy of the parties, the Regulation enables the parties, under certain circumstances, to conclude a choice of court agreement in favour of the courts of the Member State of the applicable law or of the courts of the Member State under whose law the registered partnership was created. Where a Member State holds that the registered partnership in question cannot be recognised, the courts must act swiftly and the party concerned may submit the case in any other Member State that has a connecting factor. The Regulation does not prevent the parties from settling the case amicably out of court , for instance before a notary, in a Member State of their choice. Applicable law: following the principle of unity of the applicable law, the Regulation stipulates that the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships applies to all assets falling under those consequences, regardless of where the assets are located. The law designated as applicable by the Regulation shall be applied whether or not it is the law of a Member State. The spouses may agree to designate, or to change, the law applicable to the property consequences of their registered partnership, provided that that law is one of the following: · the law of the State where the spouses or future spouses, or one of them, is habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded; or · the law of a State of nationality of either spouse or future spouse at the time the agreement is concluded; · the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created. In the absence of a choice-of-law agreement, the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships shall be the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created . By way of exception, one partner may ask for a decision that the law of a State other than the State whose law is applicable if that applicant can demonstrate that the partners had their last common habitual residence in that other State for a significantly long period of time. The Regulation sets out the issues governed by the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships, particularly the liquidation of assets and the effects of the property consequences of the registered partnership on a legal relationship between a partner and third parties. Recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions: the Regulation lays down rules relating to the recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions similar to those of other Union instruments in the area of judicial cooperation in civil matters. Grounds for non-recognition of a decision include circumstances where such recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought. The Regulation also allows for the acceptance and enforceability in all Member States of authentic instruments in matters related to the property consequences of registered partnerships, in certain circumstances. Information made available to the public: Member States shall provide the Commission with a short summary of their national legislation and procedures relating to the property consequences of registered partnerships, including information on the type of authority that has competence in the matter. ENTRY INTO FORCE: 28.7.2016. The Regulation is applicable in the Member States that participate in enhanced, as authorised by Decision (EU) 2016/954. APPLICATION: from 29.1.2019, except with respect to certain provisions that apply from 29.4.2018, and others that apply from 29.7.2016. docs: title: Regulation 2016/1104 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104 title: OJ L 183 08.07.2016, p. 0030 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2016:183:TOC title: Corrigendum to final act 32016R1104R(01) url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&model=guicheti&numdoc=32016R1104R(01) title: OJ L 113 29.04.2017, p. 0062 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2017:113:TOC
links
other	body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/ title: Justice commissioner: JOUROVÁ Věra
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee	Old JURI/8/05947 New JURI/8/05947
procedure/final/url	Old http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104 New https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104
procedure/subject	Old 4.10.02 Family policy, family law, parental leave 7.40.02 Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters New 4.10.02 Family policy, family law, parental leave 7.40.02 Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters

2016-07-12Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

activities/10	date 2016-07-08T00:00:00 docs url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104 title: Regulation 2016/1104 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2016:183:TOC title: OJ L 183 08.07.2016, p. 0030 type Final act published in Official Journal
procedure/final	url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016R1104 title Regulation 2016/1104
procedure/stage_reached	Old Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal New Procedure completed

2016-06-30Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/docs/0/text

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultation), the report by Jean-Marie CAVADA (ADLE, FR) on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

The committee approved the Commission proposal subject to the introduction of a new definition of ‘Member State’ so as to cover only Member States participating in the Registered Partnerships Regulation, in line with the definition included in Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1259/2010 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation (Rome III).

activities/6/docs/0/text

The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 68, with 34 abstentions, in the framework of a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultations), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

Parliament approved the Commission proposal without amendment.

To recall, the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.

2016-06-29Show (5) Changes | Timetravel

activities/7	date 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body CSL type Council Meeting council General Affairs meeting_id 3478
activities/8	date 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body EP type End of procedure in Parliament
activities/9	date 2016-06-24T00:00:00 body EP/CSL type Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
other/0	body CSL type Council Meeting council Former Council configuration
procedure/stage_reached	Old Awaiting final decision New Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal

2016-06-25Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

activities/5/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160622&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
activities/5/type	Old Debate in plenary scheduled New Debate in Parliament
activities/6	date 2016-06-23T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0289 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0289/2016 body EP type Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
procedure/stage_reached	Old Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage New Awaiting final decision

2016-06-19Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4

date: 2016-06-16T00:00:00

docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0208&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A8-0208/2016

body: EP

committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE

type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading

procedure/stage_reached

Old

Awaiting committee decision

New

Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage

2016-06-17Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3

date: 2016-06-14T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading

committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: VOSS Axel group: S&D name: GEBHARDT Evelyne group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: Verts/ALE name: HAUTALA Heidi responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE

2016-06-14Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2

body: CSL

meeting_id: 3473

docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3473*&MEET_DATE=10/06/2016 type: Debate in Council title: 3473

council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)

date: 2016-06-10T00:00:00

type: Council Meeting

2016-06-11Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2/type

Old

Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading

New

Debate in plenary scheduled

2016-05-21Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/committees/1/shadows/0	group EPP name VOSS Axel
activities/1/committees/1/shadows/4	group Verts/ALE name HAUTALA Heidi
committees/1/shadows/0	group EPP name VOSS Axel
committees/1/shadows/4	group Verts/ALE name HAUTALA Heidi

2016-05-13Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/committees/1/shadows/2	group GUE/NGL name MAŠTÁLKA Jiří
committees/1/shadows/2	group GUE/NGL name MAŠTÁLKA Jiří

2016-04-21Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2

date: 2016-06-22T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading

2016-04-16Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/committees/1/shadows/0	group S&D name GEBHARDT Evelyne
committees/1/shadows/0	group S&D name GEBHARDT Evelyne

2016-04-13Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1	date 2016-04-11T00:00:00 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP shadows: group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2016-03-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee	JURI/8/05947
procedure/stage_reached	Old Preparatory phase in Parliament New Awaiting committee decision

2016-04-09Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

committees/1/shadows

group: ECR name: DZHAMBAZKI Angel

2016-03-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/0/docs/0/text

PURPOSE: to establish a clear legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.

PROPOSED ACT: Council Regulation.

ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting the European Parliament but without being obliged to follow its opinion.

BACKGROUND: the increasing mobility of persons within an area without internal frontiers leads to a significant increase in the number of couples formed by nationals of different Member States who live in a Member State other than their own or acquire property in more than one Member State.

These transnational couples face practical and legal difficulties, both in the daily management of their property and in its division if the couple separate or one of its members dies.

While marriage is the most common form of couple, new forms of union have emerged, including the registered partnership, by which two people in a stable relationship formally register their union with a public authority. The difficulties encountered by couples in a registered partnership often result from the great disparities between the applicable rules governing the property effects of such unions, both in substantive law and in private international law.

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is ensured.

In the 'EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights', adopted on 27 October 2010, the Commission announced that it would adopt in 2011 a proposal for legislation to make it easier for international couples (either married or registered partners) to know which courts had jurisdiction to deal with their property rights and which law applied to their property rights

On 16 March 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes and a proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of registered partnerships. At its meeting of 3 December 2015, the Council concluded that no unanimity could be reached for the adoption of the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships and that therefore the objectives of cooperation in this area could not be attained within a reasonable period by the Union as a whole.

17 Member States addressed a request to the Commission indicating that they wished to establish enhanced cooperation.

The proposal for a Council Decision authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships.

This proposal for a Council Regulation on the property consequences of registered partnerships, and the parallel proposal for a Council Regulation on matrimonial property regimes both of which implement the enhanced cooperation and were adopted by the Commission at the same time, are the Commission's response to the request by 17 Member States.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: before the 2011 Commission proposal was drawn up, a broad consultation exercise took place with the Member States, other Union institutions and the public. The Commission conducted a joint impact study on the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships.

The two new proposals regarding matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships contain solutions similar to those presented in the 2011 proposals taking into account the discussions in the Council and the European Parliament up to the end of 2015.

CONTENT: the aim of the proposal is to establish a clear, legal framework in the European Union for determining jurisdiction and the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore deals with matters of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the property consequences of a registered partnership. The rules proposed are concerned only with cross-border cases.

Scope and definitions: according to the proposal, the notion of 'the property consequences of registered partnerships' must be given an autonomous interpretation and embrace considerations relating to both the partners' daily management of their property and the liquidation of the property as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners.

Matters already covered by existing EU regulations, such as maintenance obligations, especially between partners, and matters arising from the law of succession, are excluded from the scope of the Regulation.

The Regulation does not affect the existence or validity of a registered partnership under national law or the recognition in one Member State of a partnership registered in another Member State. It also does not affect matters of social security or the entitlement to rights to pension in case of dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership.

The property consequences of registered partnerships, which are the sole subject matter of this Regulation, are given a specific definition limiting them to existing property relationships between the partners and between the partners and third parties arising from the institutionalised relationship created by the registration of the partnership.

Jurisdiction: the aim of this Regulation is to enable citizens to have the various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State. To this end, the proposal is designed to ensure that the rules to determine the jurisdiction of the courts called on to deal with the property aspects of registered partnerships are in line with existing rules in other Union instruments and, in particular, to concentrate jurisdiction over the property regime in the Member State whose courts are handling the succession of a partner or the dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership.

To ensure that, in the event of the death of one of the spouses, the competent court can handle both the succession of the deceased spouse and the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime, this article provides that the court having jurisdiction for the succession according to the rules laid down in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 should also have jurisdiction to rule on the liquidation of the property regime of the registered partnership linked to the succession.

Applicable law: the option proposed in the Regulation is that of a single scheme: all the property of the partners, regardless of its nature (moveable or immoveable) and location, would be subject to the same law, namely the law applicable to the property regime of the registered partnership.

The partners or future partners may agree to designate or to change the law applicable to the property consequences of their registered partnership, provided that that law attaches property consequences to the institution of the registered partnership and that it is one of the following:
- the law of the State where the partners or future partners, or one of them, is habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded,
- the law of a State of nationality of either partner or future partner at the time the agreement is concluded, or
- the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created.
In the absence of any agreement, the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships shall be the law of the State under whose law the registered partnership was created. However, exceptionally, one of the partners can ask a court that the law applicable should be the law of the State where the partners had their last common habitual residence

The Regulation lists some of the matters that would be governed by the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime. Such matters include the liquidation of the property and also the effects of the matrimonial property regime on the relationships between a spouse and a third party.

To protect the family home, a Member State where the family home is located may apply its own rules for the protection of the family home. Exceptionally, this Member State may apply its own law to all persons living on its territory in 'preference' to the law normally applicable or that of a marriage agreement concluded in another Member State.

Recognition, enforceability and enforcement: the proposal provides for the free circulation of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements concerning matrimonial property regimes. It would thus introduce mutual recognition based on the mutual trust arising out of the integration of the Member States within the Union.

This free circulation would take the form of a uniform procedure for the recognition and enforcement of decisions, authentic acts and legal transactions originating in another Member State. The grounds for non-recognition or refusal to enforce are also harmonised at Union level or reduced to the absolute minimum.

2016-03-23Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

committees/1/date	2016-03-15T00:00:00
committees/1/rapporteur	group: ALDE name: CAVADA Jean-Marie

2016-03-16Show (5) Changes

activities	date: 2016-03-02T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2016/0107/COM_COM(2016)0107_EN.pdf title: COM(2016)0107 type: Legislative proposal published celexid: CELEX:52016PC0107:EN type: Legislative proposal published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/ title: Justice Commissioner: JOUROVÁ Věra
committees	body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM body: EP responsible: True committee_full: Legal Affairs committee: JURI body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee: LIBE
links
other	body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/ title: Justice commissioner: JOUROVÁ Věra
procedure	reference 2016/0060(CNS) title Jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of property consequences of registered partnerships legal_basis Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 081-p3-a1 stage_reached Preparatory phase in Parliament instrument Regulation subtype Legislation type CNS - Consultation procedure subject 4.10.02 Family policy, family law, parental leave 7.40.02 Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters

Progress: Procedure completed

Lead committee dossier:

JURI/8/05947

Legal Basis:

Subjects

Links

Events

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0208/2016 - Jean-Marie Cavada - Résolution législative #

Germany PPE

For (30)

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

Italy PPE

For (10)

Abstain (1)

Spain PPE

For (12)

Romania PPE

For (10)

Abstain (1)

France PPE

For (19)

Belgium PPE

For (3)

Portugal PPE

For (7)

Czechia PPE

For (6)

Abstain (1)

Austria PPE

For (4)

Hungary PPE

For (10)

Sweden PPE

For (3)

Bulgaria PPE

For (7)

Netherlands PPE

For (4)

Ireland PPE

For (4)

Lithuania PPE

For (2)

Denmark PPE

For (1)

Greece PPE

For (5)

Finland PPE

For (2)

Malta PPE

For (3)

Slovenia PPE

For (3)

Cyprus PPE

For (1)

Poland PPE

For (20)

Luxembourg PPE

For (1)

Croatia PPE

For (1)

Against (2)

Latvia PPE

For (1)

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

Slovakia PPE

For (1)

Against (4)

Abstain (1)

Germany S&D

For (21)

Italy S&D

For (28)

Spain S&D

For (10)

Romania S&D