2016/2011(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

– having regard to three preliminary rulings by the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European Order for Payment Procedure,1a __________________ 1aCases C-215/11, C-324/12 and Joined Cases C-119/13 and C-120/13

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)

Cc. whereas the procedure provides a rapid and efficient short-term means of settling claims, since there is no assessment of the basis of the legal relations between the parties, and whereas the rapid and efficient recovery of debts that are not the subject of any legal proceedings is of paramount importance for economic operators in the European Union;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)

Cd. whereas Regulation EC No 1896/2006 falls into the category of measures in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross- border implications and needed for the functioning of the internal market;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)

Ce. whereas late payments are a key cause of insolvency, which threatens the survival of businesses – and in particular of small and medium-sized enterprises – and results in numerous job losses;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ~~more~~concrete measures should, therefore, be ~~done~~taken to inform EU citizens, businesses, legal professionals and other relevant parties of the existence, functioning, application and advantages of the procedure;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas more should, therefore, be done to inform businesses, legal professionals, citizens and other relevant parties of the existence and advantages of the procedure through targeted awareness campaigns;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas more should, therefore, be done to inform businesses, legal professionals and other relevant parties of the existence ~~and advantages~~ of the procedure;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas, in certain Member States in which the European Order for Payment Procedure is not applied in conformity with the current Regulation, orders should be issued more quickly ~~and~~, in line within the 30-day deadline set by the regulation;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas, in certain Member States, orders should be issued more quickly and within the 30-day deadline set by the regulation, provided the obligation to pay a sum of money is not called into question by the debtor;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas, in certain Member States, orders should be issued more quickly ~~and within~~in order to meet the 30-day deadline set out by the regulation;

Amendment 19 #

Evelyn REGNER

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas, in certain Member States, orders should be issued more quickly ~~and within~~ the 30-day deadline set by the regulation should be respected;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the report is almost two years late and does not include an extended and up-to-date impact assessment ~~for~~presenting in detail the situation in each Member State as required, but only an incomplete statistical table with information dating predominantly from 2012;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the development of the e- Codex system to allow the online submission of ~~applications is to be encouraged~~the forms relating to applications, along with their efficient forwarding, is to be encouraged, through firm measures, thus making for a more efficient use of the procedure;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas more Member States should follow the French example and allow claimants to submit their applications in additional languages or otherwise facilitate support measures, in order to minimise error-margins resulting from the use of a foreign language;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas more Member States should follow the example of Freanc~~h example~~e, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus and Sweden and allow claimants to submit their applications in additional languages;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the streamlined nature of the procedure does not mean that it can be misused to enforce unfair contractual terms, since Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 calls on the court to examine whether the claim is founded, on the basis of the information available to it, thus ensuring compatibility with the relevant case law of the Court of Justice on this subject;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the streamlined nature of the procedure does not mean that it can be misused to enforce unfair contractual terms and all relevant parties should be informed about rights and procedures;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the standard forms need revising and amending in order to update the list of EU Member States and currencies, and to make better provision for an appropriate description of the interest to be recovered, with a view to the payment of interest on claims;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the standard forms need revising and future periodic review in order to update the list of EU Member States and currencies, and to make better provisions for the payment of interest on claims;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas the costs of the judicial affairs abroad, and also the excessive length of proceedings in some Member States, to hold proceedings on the basis of the European Order for Payment is much cheaper and faster, especially in times of such intense international exchange of goods;

Amendment 28 #

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

~~J. whereas the Commission should consider proposing the revision of the provisions on the scope of the procedure and on the exceptional review of orders;~~deleted

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the Commission should consider ~~proposing the~~the possibility of revisi~~on of~~ng the provisions on the scope of the procedure ~~and on the~~; whereas the Commission should also carry out an exceptional review of orders;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the report is almost two years late and does not include an extended impact assessment for each Member State as required, considering the different legal provisions in all Member States and their interoperability, but only an incomplete statistical table;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

~~1. Welcomes the successful operation of the European Order for Payment Procedure;~~deleted

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the successful operation in all the Member States of the European Order for Payment Procedure, a procedure applicable in civil and commercial matters relating to uncontested claims whose main objective is to simplify and speed up the procedure for the cross-border recognition and enforcement of creditors’ rights in the EU;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Deplores the significant delay, of almost two years, in the submission of the Commission’s report reviewing the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council creating a European Order for Payment Procedure;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets the lack of an extended, detailed impact assessment for each Member State in the Commission’s report, as required by Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006, while also regretting the lack of up-to-date data in this report on the situation in the Member States with regard to the functioning and implementation of the European Order for Payment Procedure, and calls on the Commission to produce a~~n extended impact~~ comprehensive assessment for each Member State as soon as possible;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets the lack of an extended impact assessment for each Member State in the Commission’'s report, as required by Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006, and calls on the Commission to produce an extended impact assessment for each Member State ~~as soon as possible~~without further delay;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Notes~~Regrets, likewise, that use of the European Order for Payment Procedure varies significantly between Member States; stresses in this connection that, despite the simplified modern procedure offered by EU legislation, the differences in implementation in the Member States and the desirability of choosing national legislation rather than the order for payment procedure are failing to maximise the results of the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006, and European citizens are consequently unable to exercise their rights at cross-border level, posing a risk of a decline in confidence in EU legislation;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4а. Points out that members of the public use the procedure most often, and are best informed about it, in Member States with similar instruments at national level;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that ~~it is necessary~~practical steps need to be taken to further inform ~~relevant~~EU citizens, businesses and legal professionals and other relevant actors of the availability of the European Order for Payment Procedure in cross-border cases, and of the advantages of this procedure; stresses, further, that assistance is needed for SMEs to improve their use, understanding and knowledge of existing legal instruments with a view to the enforcement of claims at cross-border level with regard to the relevant EU legislation;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that it is necessary to further inform relevant businesses and legal professionals of the availability of the European Order for Payment Procedure in cross-border cases; regulation No 1896/2006 is an optional procedure that can be used in cross-border cases as an alternative to domestic payment orders;

Amendment 39 #

Evelyn REGNER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. ~~whereas~~deploring the fact that the report is almost two years late and does not include an extended impact assessment for each Member State as required, but only an incomplete statistical table;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that it is necessary to further inform all relevant ~~businesses and legal professional~~parties of the availability of the European Order for Payment Procedure in cross-border cases;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need to hold Member States to account in providing the Commission with accurate ~~and~~, comprehensive and up-to-date data for effective monitoring and evaluation purposes and to achieve the planned objective;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need to ~~hold~~implore Member States to ~~account in~~ provid~~ing~~e the Commission with accurate and comprehensive data for the effective monitoring and evaluation purposes;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses th~~e need to hold~~at Member States ~~to account in~~should provid~~ing~~e the Commission with accurate and comprehensive data for effective monitoring and evaluation purposes;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Encourages the Member States to strive to issue orders within 30 days, and to accept applications in ~~certain~~ foreign languages, taking into consideration that translation requirements have a negative impact on costs and delays of the procedure;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Encourages the Member States to strive to issue orders within ~~30 days~~a reasonable period of time, and to accept applications in certain foreign languages;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Encourages~~Calls on the Member States to strive to issue orders within 30 days, and to accept applications in ~~certain~~at least one foreign languages;

Amendment 47 #

Evelyn REGNER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Encourages the Member States to strive to issue orders within 30 days, and to accept applications in ~~certain~~ foreign languages;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Fully supports the work being done to allow, in the future, the electronic submission of applications for a European Order for Payment; urges, in this connection, that firm steps be taken to create the e-Codex system for the online submission and effective transmission of the corresponding application forms, thereby helping to make the use of the procedure more efficient;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Fully supports the work being done to allow, in the future, the electronic submission of applications for a European Order for Payment; calls on the Commission, in this connection, to encourage use of the е-CODEX pilot project and to extend it to all Member States;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas according to statistics the operation of the procedure seems largely satisfactory, but the procedure is still under-used, while its practical application in the Member States on the whole leaves something to be desired, with it being used most frequently in countries which have a similar procedure at national level;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Fully supports the work being done to allow, in the future, the electronic submission of applications for a European Order for Payment, following a commission study that was made regarding the feasibility of electronic application for European payment orders;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to adopt updated, revised and amended standard forms as required, in order to make better provision, inter alia, for an appropriate description of the interest to be recovered, with a view to the payment of interest on claims;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to adopt updated standard forms as required, and preferably multilingual versions of these;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9а. Calls on the Member States to extend the assistance offered to members of the public in connection with the European Small Claims Procedure, and to provide assistance in respect of the completion of forms and regarding the European Order for Payment Procedure;

Amendment 54 #

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that a future review of the regulation should look at removing certain exceptions to the scope of the procedure and at revising the provisions on the review of European Orders for Payment, taking into consideration that in most Member States the procedure was only used in a relatively low number of cases;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that a future review of the regulation should look at removing certain exceptions to the scope of the procedure, which do not undermine existing law or Member States specific national competences and at revising the provisions on the review of European Orders for Payment;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that a future review of the regulation should ~~look at~~study the possibility of removing certain exceptions to the scope of the procedure and at revising the provisions on the review of European Orders for Payment;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the operation of the procedure seems largely satisfactory, but the procedure is ~~still under-used~~working greatly below its full potential;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the European Order for Payment Procedure establishes a rapid mechanism on the basis of which creditors can recover debts effectively and efficiently, and which reduces the costs of litigation and improves access to justice;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Cа. whereas the procedure is mainly used in Member States whose legislation includes a similar national procedure;

Amendment 9 #