Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | JURI | CHRYSOGONOS Kostas (GUE/NGL) | ESTARÀS FERRAGUT Rosa (EPP), GASBARRA Enrico (S&D), DZHAMBAZKI Angel (ECR), CAVADA Jean-Marie (ALDE), HAUTALA Heidi (Verts/ALE) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Activites
-
2017/09/12
Vote in plenary scheduled
-
2017/06/27
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
-
A8-0238/2017
summary
The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by Kostas CHRYSOGONOS (GUE/NGL, EL) on the implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (Mediation Directive). As a reminder, Directive 2008/52/EC on mediation aims to facilitate access to alternative dispute resolution procedures and to facilitate the amicable settlement of disputes by promoting the use of mediation and ensuring satisfactory mediation and judicial proceedings. The report noted that the Directive has proved useful for the introduction and application of mediation procedures in the European Union even though its implementation has varied considerably from one Member State to another. While most Member States have extended the scope of the application of their national measures to domestic cases too, Members regretted the fact that only three Member States have chosen to limit the transposition of the Directive to cross-border disputes only. They also regretted the difficulty of obtaining comprehensive statistics on mediation, including the success rates of mediation procedures. The main conclusions of the report can be summarised as follows: all Member States provide for the possibility for the courts to invite the parties to information sessions on mediation; many Member States financially encourage parties to use mediation, either in the form of reducing costs, providing legal aid or sanctioning them in the event of an unjustified refusal to consider mediation; the European Conduct Code for mediators is used by interested parties or as a reference for the drafting of national or sectoral codes; most Member States have introduced the use of mediation compulsory or subject to incentives or sanctions. Members welcomed the importance of mediation in family matters (especially concerning the proceedings concerning child custody, access rights and child abduction cases), where it can create a constructive climate of discussion and fair dealings between parents. However, further steps must be taken to ensure the enforceability of mediated agreements in a quick and affordable manner, with full respect for fundamental rights, as well as Union and national law. Recommendations: Members called on the Member States to encourage the use of mediation in civil and commercial disputes, in particular through information campaigns. The Commission is called upon to: assess the need to develop EU-wide quality standards for the provision of mediation services; assess the need for Member States to create national registers of mediation proceedings; examine the obstacles to free circulation of foreign mediation agreements within the Union and on the various options to promote the use of mediation as an effective way to solve conflicts in internal and cross-border disputes in the Union. In the context of the regulatory review, the Commission is invited to identify solutions that will extend effectively the scope of mediation also to other civil or administrative matters, paying particular attention to the implications that mediation could have on social issues, such as family law. Members recommended that appropriate safeguards be put in place during mediation processes to limit the risk for weaker parties and to protect them against possible abuse of process or position by more powerful parties.
-
A8-0238/2017
summary
-
2017/06/20
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2016/04/28
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0238/2017
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 32 |
2016/2066(INI)
2017/04/19
JURI
32 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC has differed greatly among Member States, with some opting for a relatively literal implementation of its provisions, others for an in-depth revision of alternative ways to dispense justice (such as Italy, for instance, which uses mediation at a rate six times higher than the rest of Europe), and others deeming their existing laws to be already in line with the Mediation Directive;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas the difficulties which have emerged at the transposition stage of the directive largely reflect the differences in legal culture across the national legal systems;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D b (new) Db. whereas the priority which should be given to a change in the legal mindset and the development of a mediation culture and friendly dispute settlement is an issue which has been repeatedly raised - first at the inception of the EU directive and subsequently during national transposition - by European networks of legal professionals;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas the Mediation Directive has not created a Union system for out-of- court dispute resolution in the strictest sense, with the exception of the introduction of specific provisions in the field of expiration of limitation and prescription periods in legal proceedings when mediation is
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the fact that in many Member States mediation systems have recently been subject to changes and revisions, and in others amendments to the applicable legislation are envisaged17 ;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Deplores
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that all the Member States make provision for the possibility for courts to invite the parties to use mediation or at least to attend information sessions on mediation; notes that, in some Member States, participation in such information sessions is obligatory, on a judge’s initiative1a, or in relation to specific disputes prescribed by law, such as family matters2a; notes, likewise, that some Member States require lawyers to inform their clients of the possibility to use mediation, or that applications to the court confirm whether mediation has been attempted or whether there are any reasons which would stand in the way of such an attempt; _________________ 1a For example in the Czech Republic. 2aFor example in Lithuania, Luxembourg, and England and Wales.
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Notes that Article 8 of the mediation directive ensures that parties that choose mediation in an attempt to settle a dispute are not subsequently prevented from having their day in court as a result of the time spent in mediation; notes that no particular issue seems to have been raised by Member States in relation to this point;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Welcomes and highlights the particular importance of mediation in the field of family law (especially in proceedings concerning child custody, access rights and child abduction cases), where it can create a constructive atmosphere for discussions and ensure fair dealings between parents; notes, further, that amicable solutions are likely to be long-lasting and can also address, in addition to the child’s primary residence, visitation arrangements or agreements concerning the child’s maintenance;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Welcomes the important role played by the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters in drawing up recommendations aimed at enhancing the use of family mediation in a cross-border context, in particular in child abduction cases;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC has differed greatly among Member States, depending on the pre-existing level of national mediation systems, with some opting for a relatively literal implementation of its provisions, others for an in-depth revision of alternative ways to
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Considers that the adoption of codes of conduct constitutes an important tool to ensure the quality of mediation; observes in this regard that the European Code of Conduct for Mediators is either directly used by stakeholders or has inspired national or sectoral codes; also observes that most Member States have obligatory accreditation procedures for mediators and/or run registries of mediators;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that, despite the voluntary nature of mediation, further steps must be taken to ensure the enforceability of mediated agreements in a quick and affordable manner, with full respect for fundamental rights, as well as Union and national law; recalls in that respect that the domestic enforceability of an agreement reached by the parties in a Union Member State is, as a general rule, subject to homolgation by a public authority, which gives rise to additional costs, is time consuming for the parties to the settlement, and could therefore negatively affect the circulation of foreign mediation settlements, especially in cases of small disputes;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that, despite the voluntary nature of mediation, further steps must be taken to ensure the enforceability of mediated agreements in a quick and affordable manner, with full respect for fundamental rights, as well as Union and national law; calls on the Commission to look into the issue of mandatory mediation more carefully; considers that this issue should be raised also bearing in mind the risk that mediation might lose its attractiveness and added value if excessively stringent standards for the parties were introduced;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to step up their efforts to
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses the importance of promoting appropriate information campaigns on the legal arrangements provided for by mediation and the advantages it has in terms of economising time and money and streamlining and simplifying legal procedures;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on Member States to step up the exchange of best practice in the various national jurisdictions, which, supported by appropriate measures at European level, will help to boost awareness of how useful mediation is;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Calls on the Commission to put in place appropriate safeguards in mediation processes to limit the risks for weaker parties and to protect them against any possible abuse of process or position by the more powerful parties, and to provide comprehensive statistical data on such safeguards;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission also to assess the need for an obligation to be introduced for Member States to create and maintain national registers of mediated proceedings
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission also to assess the need for
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital А a (new) Aa. whereas mediation, as an alternative, voluntary and confidential out-of-court procedure, which enables natural and legal persons to settle disputes out-of-court quickly and cheaply, helps ensure better access to justice;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls on the Commission, in its review of the rules, to find solutions whereby the gateways to mediation can be multiplied, extending it also to business tribunals and commercial law;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Calls for special attention to be paid to the implications that mediation has on certain social issues, such as family law, which requires strengthened protection and guarantees, by introducing mandatory uniform procedures in this instance to avoid imbalances and discrepancies in such sensitive matters;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Considers it important to ensure that fair criteria are complied with in terms of costs, especially in order to protect the interests of insolvent people and disadvantaged groups;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital А b (new) Ab. whereas the mediation procedure enables civil and commercial disputes to be settled quickly and cheaply and may thus contribute to economic growth;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas most Member States have extended the scope of application of their national transposing measures to domestic cases too
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas most Member States have considerably extended the scope of application of their national transposing measures to domestic cases too, having a decisively positive impact on the laws of the Member States and the categories concerned;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the implementation of the Mediation Directive has provided EU added value by raising awareness among national legislators of the advantages of mediation, bringing about a degree of alignment with regard to procedural law and diverse practices in the Member States;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas, even though Directive 2008/52/EC has been an extremely important milestone with regard to the implementation and use of mediation procedures in the European Union, the objectives stated in Article 1 of the Mediation Directive aimed at encouraging the use of mediation and in particular at achieving a ‘balanced relationship between mediation and judicial proceedings’ have
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) D a. whereas mediation can be a useful tool to alleviate overloaded court systems in certain cases and subject to the necessary safeguards, notably it can contribute to reducing the length of court proceedings which - in excess - can be a violation of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
source: 603.057
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| activities/3/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
| activities/2/docs/0/text |
|
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/2/docs |
|
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/4/date |
Old
2017-09-14T00:00:00New
2017-09-12T00:00:00 |
| activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
| activities/2 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
| activities/1 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
| activities/1 |
|
| other/0/dg |
Old
JusticeNew
|
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
| other/0/dg |
Old
New
Justice |
| procedure/legal_basis |
|
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|