2018/0168(COD) | [ParlTrack]

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Effective and efficient protection of victims of traffic accidents requires that those victims are always reimbursed for their personal injuries or for damage to their property, irrespective of whether the insurance undertaking of the party liable is solvent or not. Member States should therefore set up or appoint a body that provides, without any delay, initial compensation for injured parties habitually residing within their territory, and which has the right to reclaim that compensation from the body set up or appointed for the same purpose in the Member State of establishment of the insurance undertaking which issued the policy of the vehicle of the liable party. However, to avoid parallel claims being introduced, victims of traffic incidents should not be allowed to present a claim for compensation with that body if they have already presented their claim or have taken legal action with the insurance undertaking concerned and that claim is still under consideration and that action is still pending.

Amendment 11 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Previous claims histories of policyholders who seek to conclude new insurance contracts with insurance undertakings should be easily authenticated in order to facilitate the recognition of such claims history when concluding a new insurance policy. In order to simplify the verification and authentication of claims history statements, it is important that the content and format of the statement of such claims histories are the same across all Member States. In addition, insurance undertakings ~~that take into account claims history statements to determine motor insurance premiums should not~~should use a compulsory ‘bonus-malus’ system to determine motor insurance premiums. Claims history statements should be taken into account. There should be no discriminateion on the basis of nationality or solely on the basis of the previous Member State of residence of the policyholder. To enable Member States to verify how insurance undertakings treat claims history statements, insurance undertakings should publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history when calculating premiums.

Amendment 12 #

Gilles LEBRETON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) To ensure that the minimum amounts stay in line with the evolving economic reality (and are not eroded over time) the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the adaptation of those minimum amounts of cover of motor third party liability insurance to reflect the evolving economic reality, as well as to define the procedural tasks and the procedural obligations of the bodies set up to provide compensation or entrusted the task of providing compensation pursuant to Article 10a with regard to the reimbursement. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.deleted

Amendment 13 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) As part of the evaluation of the functioning of the Directive, the European Commission should monitor the application of the Directive, taking into account the number of victims, the amount of outstanding claims due to delays in payments following cross-border insolvency cases, the level of minimum amounts of cover in Member States, the amount of claims due to uninsured driving relating to cross-border traffic and the number of complaints regarding claims history statements In the context of the evaluation of the functioning of Directive 2009/103/EC, the Commission should also examine and assess whether, in the light of technological progress, including the increasing use of autonomous and semi- autonomous vehicles, it continues to serve its purpose of protecting the victims of road traffic accidents from the insolvency of insurers in accidents caused by vehicles.

Amendment 14 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) As part of the evaluation of the functioning of the Directive, the European Commission should monitor the application of the Directive, taking into account the number of victims, the amount of outstanding claims due to delays in payments following cross-border insolvency cases, the level of minimum amounts of cover in Member States, the amount of claims due to uninsured driving relating to cross-border traffic and the number of complaints regarding claims history statements. At the same time, that monitoring should be future-proofed and seek to ensure that the objectives of the Directive are met as regards new technological developments in fields such as electric vehicles and autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles.

Amendment 15 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Since the objectives of this Directive, in particular to ensure an equal minimum protection of victims of traffic accidents across the Union ~~and~~, to ensure the protection of victims in case of insolvency of insurance undertakings, and to ensure equal treatment in the authentication of claims history statements by insurers for potential policy holders traversing internal EU borders cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of their effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty of the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

Amendment 16 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1

1a. ‘use of a vehicle’ means ~~any~~ use of such vehicle, intended normally to serve as a means of transport, that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle~~, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used~~ and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 17 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

1a. In Article 2, a new paragraph is added: ‘This Directive shall only apply to motor vehicles covered by Regulation (EU) 2018/858*, Regulation (EU) 167/2013**or Regulation (EU) 168/2013***. Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC (OJ L 151, 14.6.2018, pp. 1-218). **Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 February 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of agricultural and forestry vehicles (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 1). Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles (Text with EEA relevance)(OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 52).”

Amendment 18 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

However, they may carry out such checks on insurance provided that those checks are non-discriminatory, necessary and proportionate to achieve the end pursued, ~~and~~guarantee the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the person concerned, and (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)

Amendment 19 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) for personal injuries: EUR 610 0700 000 per accident, irrespective of the number of victims, or EUR 1 220 000 per victim;

Amendment 2 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (motor insurance) is of special importance for European citizens, whether they are policyholders or potential victims of an accident. It is also a major concern for insurance undertakings, as it constitutes an important segment of non-life insurance business in the Union. Motor insurance also has an significant impact on the free movement of persons, goods and vehicles, and hence on the internal market and the Schengen area. It should therefore be a key objective of the Union action in the field of financial services to reinforce and consolidate the internal market for motor insurance.

Amendment 20 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 a a (new)

(aa) the insurance undertaking became insolvent

Amendment 21 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a b (new)

(ab) the insurance undertaking has insufficient financial resources to compensate victims of accidents involving autonomous vehicles circulating within the EU;

Amendment 22 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the insurance undertaking or its claims representative has not provided a reasoned reply to the points made in a claim for compensation within ~~three~~6 months after the date on which the injured party presented his or her claim to that insurance undertaking.

Amendment 23 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10

3. The body referred to in paragraph 1 shall give a reply to the claim within twohree months after the date on which the injured party has presented his or her claim for compensation.

Amendment 24 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16

Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings orand the bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, when taking account of claims history statements issued by other insurance undertakings or other bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, do not treat policyholders in a discriminatory manner or surcharge their premiums because of their nationality or solely on the basis of their previous Member State of residence.

Amendment 25 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16

Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings and the bodies referred to in the second subparagraph incorporate a compulsory ‘bonus-malus’ system in their third-party liability motor vehicle insurance contracts, which calculates the amount of insurance premiums of each policyholder in accordance with the claims history statements.

Amendment 26 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16

~~Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history statements when calculating premiums.~~deleted

Amendment 27 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16

Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history statements when calculating premiums, in particular also in relation to the ‘bonus- malus’ system they use.

Amendment 28 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28c

No later than sefiven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation of this Directive shall be carried out. In particular, the expediency of this Directive with regard to technological developments relating to autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles should be assessed, and it should be examined whether the regime of liability of this Directive takes into account the new technological conditions or whether a new strict liability offence should be introduced which is based solely on autonomous vehicles as a source of danger and at the same time involves no uncontrolled liability risks in order not to stand in the way of the use of new technologies. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation, accompanied by its observations, to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee~~. (Technical error: the directive in question is a proposal for a~~, attaching, where necessary, a legislative proposal. Or. de amending Directive 20~~18/0168 (COD~~09/103/EC.)

Amendment 29 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

Amendment 3 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) The Commission has carried out an evaluation of the functioning of Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council15, including its efficiency effectiveness and coherence with other Union policies. The conclusion of the evaluation was that Directive 2009/103/EC functions well on the whole, and does not need amendment in most aspects. However, four areas were identified where targeted amendments would be appropriate: compensation of victims of accidents in cases of insolvency of an insurance undertaking, minimum obligatory amounts of insurance cover, insurance checks of vehicles by Member States, and the use of policyholders’ claims history statements by a new insurance undertaking. A compulsory ‘bonus-malus’ system should also be introduced to be used in the calculation of insurance premiums based on claims history statements by insurance undertakings. Such a system would be an incentive for safe driving and thus make road traffic safer. It would also lead to fairer insurance premiums for consumers. _________________ 15 Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (OJ L 263, 7.10.2009, p. 11).

Amendment 30 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

Amendment 31 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1

Amendment 32 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2

They shall apply those provisions from [PO: Please insert date 124 months after the date of entry into force ].

Amendment 4 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) According to the case law of the European Court of Justice, in principle all existing and new motor vehicles fall within the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC. However, particularly with new types of vehicle, such as electric bicycles, electric scooters and Segways, this does not seem to be absolutely necessary. They are much smaller and have a lower maximum speed, so their damage/injury potential is not so great. The undifferentiated application of compulsory insurance seems disproportionate, especially given the need to promote the development of new alternative modes of transport, which occupy less public road space and are more environmentally friendly. This Directive should therefore apply only to those vehicles which under EU law have to satisfy safety requirements as a condition for approval. Of course, accidents may also occur when such vehicles are used, so that Member States should be free to adopt or maintain at national level rules which also provide for liability insurance for vehicles which are not subject to type approval.

Amendment 5 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) By pursuing the general objectives of ensuring a high level of protection for victims of road traffic accidents and of facilitating the free movement of persons and vehicles throughout the EU, this Directive will help improve confidence in the single market for motor insurance by increasing legal certainty over cross- border sales of motor insurance based on the freedom to provide services, while reducing the risks that may arise during the compensation to victims process.

Amendment 6 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)

(3b) This Directive strikes an appropriate balance between the public interest and the potential costs for public authorities, insurers and policy holders, with a view to ensuring that the measures proposed are cost-effective.

Amendment 7 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4

(4) Member States currently ~~should~~are refraining from performing checks of insurance on vehicles normally based on the territory of another Member State and in respect of vehicles normally based in the territory of a third country entering their territory from the territory of another Member State. New technological developments ~~allow for~~, such as number-plate recognition technology, allow for the discrete checking of insurance of vehicles without stopping them and thus without interfering with the free movement of persons. It is therefore appropriate to allow those checks of insurance on vehicles, only if they are non-discriminatory, necessary and proportionate, form part of a general system of checks on the national territory and do not require stopping of the vehicle and if they guarantee the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the person concerned.

Amendment 8 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)

(4a) Uninsured driving, circulating with a motor vehicle without a compulsory motor third party liability insurance, is an increasing problem within the EU. The cost for the EU has been estimated at € 870 million in claims in 2011 for the EU as a whole. It shall be stressed that uninsured driving negatively affects a wide range of stakeholders including victims of accidents, insurers, guarantee funds and motor insurance policyholders.

Amendment 9 #

Gilles LEBRETON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) Member States that opt to set up a system that processes personal data which may subsequently be shared with other Member States, such as data from number plate recognition technology, need to legislate to allow for the processing of personal data for the purposes of combatting uninsured driving, whilst establishing suitable measures to safeguard the data subject's rights and freedoms and legitimate interests. The provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council19 apply to the processing of personal data for the purpose of combatting uninsured driving. The Member States' legislation shcould in particular specify the precise purpose, refer to the relevant legal basis, comply with the relevant security requirements and respect the principles of necessity, proportionality, and purpose limitation, and should set a proportionate data retention period. In addition, the principles of personal data protection by design and data protection by default should be applied to all data processing systems developed and used within the framework of the Member States' legislation. _________________ 19 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

source: 630.675

2018/12/10 IMCO 84 amendments...

Amendment 100 #

Jiří POSPÍŠIL, Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The body referred to in paragraph 1 shall provide the compensation within three months of communicating their reply, in accordance with paragraph 3, to the injured party.

Amendment 101 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 4

4. Where the injured party is resident in another Member State than the Member State in which the ~~insurance undertaking referred to in paragraph 1 is establish~~vehicle causing the accident is insured, the body referred to in paragraph 1 and which has compensated that injured party in his or her Member State of residence, shall be entitled to claim reimbursement of the sum paid by way of compensation from the body referred to in paragraph 1 in the Member State ~~in which the insurance undertaking which issued the policy of the liable party is establish~~where the vehicle causing the accident is insured.

Amendment 102 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 6

6. Member States shall not allow the body referred to in paragraph 1 to make the payment of compensation subject to any reduction or requirements other than those laid down in this Directive and in particular not the requirement that the injured party should establish that the party liable or the insurance undertaking is unable or refuses to pay.

Amendment 103 #

Jiří POSPÍŠIL, Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Member States shall provide for penalties against insurance undertakings that have failed to comply with their obligations under this Article. Such penalties shall be proportionate, effective and dissuasive.

Amendment 104 #

Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. The latter body shall be subrogated to the injured party in his or her rights against the body referred to in paragraph 1 established in the Member State where the liable party is resident, in so far as the compensation body in the injured party's Member State of residence provided compensation for personal injuries or damage to property. Each Member State shall be obliged to acknowledge this subrogation as provided for by any other Member State.

Amendment 105 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Injured parties referred to in Article 20(1) may, in the situations referred to in paragraph 1, apply for compensation from the compensation body referred to in Article 24 in their Member State of residence.

Amendment 106 #

Jiří POSPÍŠIL, Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. The compensation body which has compensated the injured party in his or her Member State of residence shall be entitled to claim reimbursement of the sum paid by way of compensation from the compensation body in the Member State where the vehicle causing the accident is insured.

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16

(5) Article 16 is amended as follows: (a) the following sentence is added at the end of the second subparagraph: “They shall do so using the form of the claims history statement”; (b) the following subparagraphs are added: “Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings or the bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, when taking account of claims history statements issued by other insurance undertakings or other bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, do not treat policyholders in a discriminatory manner or surcharge their premiums because of their nationality or solely on the basis of their previous Member State of residence. Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history statements when calculating premiums. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing acts in accordance with Article 28a(2) specifying the contents and form of the claims history statement referred to in the second subparagraph. That statement shall contain information about all of the following: (a) the identity of the insurance undertaking issuing the claims history statement; (b) the identity of the policyholder; (c) the vehicle insured; (d) the period of cover of the vehicle insured: (e) the number and value of the declared third party liability claims during the period covered by the claims history statement."deleted

Amendment 108 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 3

Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings or the bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, when taking account of claims history statements issued by other insurance undertakings or other bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph, do not treat policyholders in a discriminatory manner oreither by withholding discounts commonly referred to as “no claims bonuses” or by applying surcharges to their premiums or any way whatsoever because of their nationality or solely on the basis of their previous Member State of residence.

Amendment 109 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Member States shall require insurance undertakings and the bodies referred to in the second subparagraph to integrate into motor vehicle insurance contracts a mandatory bonus-malus system, including a discount by way of a “no claims bonus”, in which premiums are influenced by policyholders’ claims history statement.

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 4

Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings ~~publish their policies in respect of their use of~~and the bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph publish, in a standardised form, their bonus-malus policies, including the way claims history statements are taken into account when calculating premiums.

Amendment 111 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 4

Without prejudice to the pricing policies of insurance undertakings, Member States shall ensure that insurance undertakings publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history statements when calculating premiums.

Amendment 112 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 4 a (new)

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28a to establish a standardised presentation of the information published by insurance undertakings and the bodies as referred to in the second subparagraph regarding their bonus-malus systems. When exercising that power, the Commission shall ensure that the system guarantees a high degree of comparability and transparency.

Amendment 113 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt ~~implementing~~delegated acts in accordance with Article 28a~~(2) specify~~ in order to definge the contents and form of the claims history statement referred to in the second subparagraph. That statement shall contain information about all of the following:

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the identity, the date of birth, and the number and date of issue of the driving licence of the policyholder;

Amendment 115 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point c

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point d

(d) the ~~period of cover~~date of inception and date of expiration of the insurance of the vehicle ~~insured~~:

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point e

(e) the number and ~~value~~the nature, as regards damage to property and/or personal injury, of the declared third party liability claims during the period covered by the claims history statement.

Amendment 118 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point e a (new)

(ea) the number of years driven without accidents;

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point e b (new)

(eb) the latest reference to any risk classification by the insurer;

Amendment 120 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point e c (new)

(ec) the contact address of the policyholder;

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 – point e d (new)

(ed) the date of issue of the insurance undertakings’ policy that is used in respect of their use of claims history statements when calculating premiums.

Amendment 122 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)

The Commission shall consult with all relevant stakeholders before adopting those implementing acts and seek to reach a mutual agreement between stakeholders as to the content and the form of the claims history statement.

Amendment 123 #

Andreas SCHWAB

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 26 a (new)

5a. The following Article is inserted: “Article 26a Limitation period 1. Member States shall ensure that a limitation period of at least three years applies to actions under Articles 19 and 20(2) that relate to compensation for personal injury and damage to property resulting from a cross-border road traffic accident. The limitation period shall begin to run from the day on which the claimant became aware, or had reasonable grounds to become aware, of the extent of the injury, loss or damage, its cause and the identity of the person liable and the insurance undertaking covering this person against civil liability or the claim representative or compensation body responsible for providing compensation and against whom the claim is to be brought. 2. Member States shall ensure that where the proper law of the claim provides for a limitation period which is longer than three years, such longer limitation period shall apply. 3. Member States shall ensure that they provide the Commission with up-to- date information on national rules of limitation for damages caused by traffic accidents. The Commission shall make publicly available and accessible, in all Union languages, that general information communicated by Member States.”

Amendment 124 #

Andreas SCHWAB

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 26 b (new)

5b. The following Article is inserted: “Article 26b Suspension of limits 1. Member States shall ensure that the limitation provided for in Article 26a is suspended during the period between submission by the claimant of his or her claim to: (a) the insurance undertaking of the person who caused the accident or its claims representative referred to in Articles 21 and 22; or (b) the compensation body referred to in Articles 24 and 25, and the defendant’s rejection of the claim. 2. Where the remaining part of the limitation period, once the period of suspension ends, is less than six months, Member States shall ensure that the claimant is granted a minimum period of six additional months to initiate court proceedings. 3. Member States shall ensure that, if a period expires on a Saturday or a Sunday or on one of their official holidays, it shall be extended until the end of the first following working day.”

Amendment 125 #

Andreas SCHWAB

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 26 c (new)

5c. The following Article is inserted: “Article 26c Calculation of time limits Member States shall ensure that any period of time laid down by this Directive is calculated as follows: (a) calculation shall start on the day following the day on which the relevant event occurred; (b) when a period is expressed as one year or a number of years, it shall expire in the relevant subsequent year in the month having the same name and on the day having the same number as the month and the day on which the said event occurred. If the relevant subsequent month has no day with the same number, the period shall expire on the last day of that month; (c) periods shall not be suspended during court recesses.”

Amendment 126 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Articles 28 a, 28 b and 28 c

~~[...]~~deleted

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part

(6) the following Articles ~~28a,~~ 28b and 28c are inserted:

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 a

1. The Commission shall be assisted by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Committee established by Commission Decision 2004/9/EC ****.That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council*****. 2. paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.Article 28a Committee procedure deleted Where reference is made to this

Amendment 129 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 b – paragraph 2

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 9(2) ~~and 10a(7)~~ shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the date referred to in Article 30. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 10a(7) and 16 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from [the date of entry into force of this Directive].

Amendment 130 #

Jiří POSPÍŠIL, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 b – paragraph 5

5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 9(2) and 10a(7) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of twohree months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

Amendment 131 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

No later than sefiven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation and full review of this Directive shall be carried out. This evaluation shall, in particular, assess the suitability of this Directive in the light of technological developments related to autonomous, semi-autonomous and high speed small vehicles falling under categories of vehicles as referred to in Article 2, paragraph 2, point h), i), j), k) of Regulation (EU) No 168/2013, and whether the liability system it provides is likely to satisfy future needs. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation accompanied by its observations and, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.

Amendment 132 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

No later than sefiven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation of this Directive shall be carried out. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation accompanied by its observations to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee evaluating the implementation of this Directive, in particular in respect of: (a) the application of this Directive with regard to technological developments, in particular with regard to autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles; (b) an analysis of the adequacy of the scope of this Directive, considering the accidents risks posed by different motor vehicles, in view of likely changes in the market. The report shall be accompanied by the observations of the Commission and, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal.

Amendment 133 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

No later than seven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation of this Directive shall be carried out. That evaluation shall, in particular, assess the suitability of this Directive in light of technological developments related to autonomous and semi- autonomous vehicles. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation accompanied by its observations to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.

Amendment 134 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c

Amendment 135 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1

Member States shall adopt and publish, by [PO: Please insert date 124 months after the date of entry into force ] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. However, the transposition and entry into force of Article 1(4) of this Directive with regard to the provisions of Article 10(a) shall take place before [PO: please insert the date – 12 months after entry into force].

Amendment 51 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) The Commission has carried out an evaluation of the functioning of Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council15, including its efficiency effectiveness and coherence with other Union policies. The conclusion of the evaluation was that Directive 2009/103/EC functions well on the whole, and does not need amendment in most aspects. However, four areas were identified where targeted amendments would be appropriate: compensation of ~~victims of accident~~injured parties in cases of insolvency of an insurance undertaking, minimum obligatory amounts of insurance cover, insurance checks of vehicles by Member States, and the use of policyholders’ claims history statements by a new insurance undertaking. __________________ 15 Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (OJ L 263, 7.10.2009, p. 11).

Amendment 52 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) It is furthermore necessary to introduce the obligation for insurance contracts to include a mandatory bonus- malus system, including discounts by way of a “no claims bonus”, in which premiums are influenced by the policyholders’ claims history statement. Such a system would incentivise safer driving behaviours, thus increasing road safety, and would offer better conditions to consumers.

Amendment 53 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3

(3) Furthermore, in recent decisions of the European Court of Justice of the European Union, namely Vnuk16, Rodrigues de Andrade17 and Torreiro18, the Court has clarified the meaning of the words ‘use of a vehicle’. In particular, the European Court of Justice has clarified that motor vehicles are intended ~~normal~~mainly to serve as means of transport at the time of the accident, irrespective of such vehicle's characteristics, and it has clarified that the use of such vehicles covers any use of a vehicle consistent with its normal function as a means of transport, irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion. In the interest of legal certainty, it is appropriate to reflect that case law in Directive 2009/103/EC by introducing a definition of ‘use of a vehicle’. __________________ 16 Judgement of the Court of Justice of 4 December 2014, Vnuk, C-162/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2146 17 Judgement of the Court of Justice of 28 November 2017, Rodrigues de Andrade, C-514/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:908. 18 Judgement of the Court of Justice of 20 December 2017, Torreiro, C-334/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:1007.

Amendment 54 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) Any existing or new types of motor vehicles fall within the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC. However, some vehicles are less likely to cause significant damage to persons or property than others. It would be disproportionate to extend the scope of compulsory third party liability insurance to such vehicles. It is therefore necessary to limit the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC to those vehicles for which the Union considers that safety and security requirements are necessary before they are placed in the market, i.e. vehicles that are subject to type-approval. In line with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, requirements at EU level should cover those vehicles that have the potential to cause significant damage and might be used in a cross-border situation. Nothing in this Directive prevents Member States from maintaining or introducing new provisions covering these vehicles. Member States should continue to be able to decide at national level the appropriate level of protection of road users who may be injured by vehicles other than those subject to type-approval.

Amendment 55 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) Only vehicles for which prior administrative authorisation is required for their use on the roads and those which fall within the scope of application of type-approval regulations Regulation (EU) 2018/858, Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 should remain within the scope of application of the Directive. Consequently, new alternative mobility vehicles such as electric bicycles and scooters or similar would be outside the scope of the Directive. This exclusion is founded on the principle of proportionality, as the risk posed by the use of these vehicles in traffic is lower than it is for other vehicles.

Amendment 56 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) In view of a key focus of this Directive being for the benefit of parties injured in vehicle accidents, it should be further noted that a wide interpretation of scope is required. The mere existence of other forms of insurance for vehicles that are not necessarily used on public roads does not ensure any or a fair level of compensation for victims of accidents caused by such vehicles. In addition, ensuring a purposive approach to the scope of the Directive will assist in the continuing protection of citizens in the light of developments in vehicle technologies.

Amendment 57 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) Member States should avoid a situation where insurance is required for vehicles which are registered but incapable of being moved because they are in a museum, because they are undergoing restoration or because they are not being used for a lengthy period of time for another reason and are immobilised by the disconnection of the battery or other essential component.

Amendment 58 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)

(3b) It is further appropriate to exclude from the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC all vehicles intended exclusively for use in non-traffic situations. These vehicles are generally used in controlled environments and are subject to other forms of liability insurance, such as employers’ or public liability insurance, which ensures that injured parties received adequate compensation. However, it should continue to be possible for individual Member States to decide whether compulsory motor insurance is the appropriate form of cover for these vehicles and under what conditions.

Amendment 59 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)

(3b) To better protect potential victims, in cases falling outside the scope of the Directive, as stated above and in Article 1, the Member States may establish civil liability insurance commensurate with the risk posed.

Amendment 60 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 c (new)

(3c) Use of vehicles in traffic includes the use of a vehicle on a road or other public place. Traffic implies a certain degree of volume and regularity. The isolated use of a vehicle for other purposes in areas without public access should not be seen as the use of a vehicle in traffic and should not lead to an obligation to hold compulsory insurance. Where a vehicle is used in non-traffic- related situations, Member States should be able to limit the scope of compulsory insurance. This is particularly relevant in situations where the principal function of the vehicle, at the time of the accident, was related to secondary functions of that vehicle. Nothing in this Directive prevents Member States from maintaining or introducing new provisions that extend the scope of compulsory motor insurance to these situations.

Amendment 61 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 d (new)

(3d) To avoid a situation where insurance is required for vehicles which are registered but incapable of being moved because they are in a museum, because they are undergoing restoration or because they are not being used for a lengthy period of time and are immobilised by the disconnection of the battery or other essential component, the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC should be explicitly limited to vehicles which are capable of use.

Amendment 62 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4

(4) Member States currently should refrain from performing checks of insurance on vehicles normally based on the territory of another Member State and in respect of vehicles normally based in the territory of a third country entering their territory from the territory of another Member State. New technological developments allow for checking insurance of vehicles without stopping them and thus without interfering with the free movement of persons. It is therefore appropriate allow those checks of insurance on vehicles, only if they are non-discriminatory, necessary and proportionate, form part of a general system of checks on the national territory, which are carried out also in respect of vehicles based in the territory of the Member State, and do not require stopping of the vehicle.

Amendment 63 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Effective and efficient protection of victims of traffic accidents requires that those victims are always reimbursed for their personal injuries or for damage to their property, irrespective of whether the insurance undertaking of the party liable is solvent or not. Member States should therefore set up or appoint a body that provides initial compensation, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation referred to in Article 9(1) or the guarantee limits prescribed by the Member State if higher, for injured parties habitually residing within their territory, and which has the right to reclaim that compensation from the body set up or appointed for the same purpose in the Member State of establishment of the insurance undertaking which issued the policy of the vehicle of the liable party. However, to avoid parallel claims being introduced, victims of traffic incidents should not be allowed to present a claim for compensation with that body if they have already presented their claim or have taken legal action with the insurance undertaking concerned and that claim is still under consideration and that action is still pending.

Amendment 64 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Effective and efficient protection of victims of traffic accidents requires that those victims are always reimbursed the amounts due for their personal injuries or for damage to their property, irrespective of whether the insurance undertaking of the party liable is solvent or not. Member States should therefore set up or appoint a body that provides initial compensation for injured parties habitually residing within their territory, and which has the right to reclaim that compensation from the body set up or appointed for the same purpose in the Member State of establishment of the insurance undertaking which issued the policy of the vehicle of the liable party. However, to avoid parallel claims being introduced, victims of traffic incidents should not be allowed to present a claim for compensation with that body if they have already presented their claim or have taken legal action with the insurance undertaking concerned and that claim is still under consideration and that action is still pending.

Amendment 65 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Effective and efficient protection of victims of traffic accidents requires that those victims are always reimbursed for their personal injuries or for damage to their property, irrespective of whether the insurance undertaking of the party liable is solvent or not. Member States should therefore set up or appoint a body that provides initial compensation for injured parties habitually residing within their territory, and which has the right to reclaim that compensation from the body set up or appointed for the same purpose in the Member State of establishment of the insurance undertaking which issued the policy of the vehicle of the liable party. However, to avoid parallel claims being introduced, victims of traffic incidents should not be allowed to present a claim for compensation with that body if they have already presented their claim ~~or have taken legal action with~~against the insurance undertaking concerned and that claim is still under consideration and that action is still pending.

Amendment 66 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Previous claims histories of policyholders who seek to conclude new insurance contracts with insurance undertakings should be easily authenticated in order to facilitate the recognition of such claims history when concluding a new insurance policy. In order to simplify the verification and authentication of claims history statements, it is important that the content and format of the statement of such claims histories are the same across all Member States. In addition, insurance undertakings that take into account claims history statements to determine motor insurance premiums should not discriminate on the basis of nationality or solely on the basis of the previous Member State of residence of the policyholder. To enable Member States to verify how insurance undertakings treat claims history statements, insurance undertakings should publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history when calculating premiums.deleted

Amendment 67 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Previous claims histories of policyholders who seek to conclude new insurance contracts with insurance undertakings should be easily authenticated in order to facilitate the recognition of such claims history when concluding a new insurance policy. In order to simplify the verification and authentication of claims history statements, it is important that the content and format of the statement of such claims histories are the same across all Member States. In addition, ~~insurance undertakings that~~a mandatory bonus-malus system, incorporating discounts by way of a “no claims bonus”, should be introduced. When takeing into account claims history statements to determine motor insurance premiums, insurance undertakings should not discriminate on the basis of nationality or solely on the basis of the previous Member State of residence of the policyholder. To enable Member States to verify how insurance undertakings apply their bonus- malus systems and treat claims history statements, insurance undertakings should publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history when calculating premiums.

Amendment 68 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Previous claims histories of policyholders who seek to conclude new insurance contracts with insurance undertakings should be easily authenticated in order to facilitate the recognition of such claims history when concluding a new insurance policy. In order to simplify the verification and authentication of claims history statements, it is important that the content and format of the statement of such claims histories are the same across all Member States. In addition, insurance undertakings that take into account claims history statements to determine motor insurance premiums should not discriminate on the basis of nationality or solely on the basis of the previous Member State of residence of the policyholder. To enable Member States to verify how insurance undertakings treat claims history statements, insurance undertakings should publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history when calculating premiums.

Amendment 69 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission regarding the content and the form of the claims history statement. Those implementing powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council20. __________________ 20 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).deleted

Amendment 70 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

Amendment 71 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) In a view to bring full effect to the use of claims history statements when calculating premiums, Member States should encourage the participation of insurance undertakings in transparent price comparison tools.

Amendment 72 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in order to establish the standardised presentation of the information published by insurance undertakings regarding their bonus- malus systems, including the no claims bonus, and the content and the form of the claims history statement. To ensure that the minimum amounts stay in line with the evolving economic reality (and are not eroded over time) the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the adaptation of those minimum amounts of cover of motor third party liability insurance to reflect the evolving economic reality, as well as to define the procedural tasks and the procedural obligations of the bodies set up to provide compensation or entrusted the task of providing compensation pursuant to Article 10a with regard to the reimbursement. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

Amendment 73 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) As part of the evaluation of the functioning of the Directive, the European Commission should monitor the application of the Directive, especially in the field of autonomous and semi- autonomous vehicles, as well as the scope of the Directive in view of likely changes in the market, taking into account the number of victims, the amount of outstanding claims due to delays in payments following cross-border insolvency cases, the level of minimum amounts of cover in Member States, the amount of claims due to uninsured driving relating to cross-border traffic and the number of complaints regarding claims history statements

Amendment 74 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Since the objectives of this Directive, in particular to ensure an equal minimum protection of ~~vic~~injured partimes ofollowing traffic accidents across the Union and to ensure their protection ~~of victims~~ in case of insolvency of insurance undertakings, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of their effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty of the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

Amendment 75 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) To promote a consistent approach for victims of incidents where a motor vehicle is used as a weapon to commit a violent crime or terrorist act, Member States should ensure their respective national motor guarantee body regulated by Article 10 of Directive 2009/103/EC handles any and all claims arising from such an act.

Amendment 76 #

Pascal DURAND

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1

-1 In Article 1, point 1 is amended as follows: 1. ‘vehicle’ means any motor vehicle intended for travel on land and propelled solely by mechanical power or where the mechanical power is designed to propel the motor vehicle to speeds in excess of 25 km/h, but not running on rails, and any trailer, whether or not coupled;

Amendment 77 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

1a. ‘use of a vehicle’ means any use of such vehicle, intended normally to serve as a means of transport or for connected purposes, that is consistent with ~~the~~a normal function of that vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 78 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

(1a) ‘use of a vehicle’ means any use of ~~such~~a vehicle~~, intended normally~~ that requires administrative authorisation and is mainly intended to serve as a means of transport at the time of the accident, that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion."; (This amendment applies throughout the text; Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)

Amendment 79 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

1a. ‘'use of a vehicle’' means any use of such vehicle, in~~tended normally to serve as a means of transport, that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and~~ traffic that is, at the time of the accident, used as a means of transport, irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 80 #

Lara COMI

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

1a. ‘'use of a vehicle’ means any use of such vehicle, in~~tended normally to serve as a means of transport, that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle,~~ traffic, that is, at the time of the accident, consistent with the vehicle’s function, as means of transport, that is irrespective of the vehicle'’s characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 81 #

Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

1a. ‘'use of a vehicle’' means any use of such vehicle, in traffic, that is intended ~~normal~~primarily to serve as a means of transport~~, that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and~~ and that, at the time of the accident, was being used in line with its primary function on public roads and irrespective of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 82 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a

1a. ‘use of a vehicle’ means any use of such vehicle, intended normally to ~~serve as a means of transport~~be used in traffic, that is consistent with the normal function of thate vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;

Amendment 83 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 2 – paragraphs 1 a and 1 b (new)

(1a) In Article 2, the following paragraphs are added: The scope of this Directive shall include but not be limited to all vehicles covered by Regulation (EU) 2018/858, Regulation (EU) 2016/1628, Regulation (EU) No 168/2013, or Regulation (EU) No 167/2013. This Directive shall apply notwithstanding that the use of a vehicle is partly or wholly for recreational purposes, or in the context of sporting activities or entertainment.

Amendment 84 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1

(1b) In Article 3, the first paragraph is amended as follows: Each Member State shall, subject to Article 5, take all appropriate measures to ensure that civil liability in respect of ~~the use of vehicles~~vehicles which are capable of use normally based in its territory isare covered by insurance.

Amendment 85 #

Roberta METSOLA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)

(1b) In Article 3, the following paragraph is added: Member States shall ensure that when a vehicle is required to hold third party motor insurance pursuant to the first paragraph, the insurance is also valid and covers injured parties in the case of accidents occurring when that vehicle is in traffic on public roads and not being used in line with its primary function.

Amendment 86 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1

Member States shall refrain from making checks on insurance against civil liability in respect of vehicles normally based in the territory of another Member State and in respect of vehicles normally based in the territory of a third country entering their territory from the territory of another Member State, so as to avoid obstructing the flow of traffic or inconveniencing travellers.

Amendment 87 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

However, they may carry out such checks on insurance provided that those checks are non-discriminatory, necessary and proportionate ~~to achieve the end pursued~~, and

Amendment 88 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b

(b) they form part of a general system of checks on the national territory, which are carried out also in respect of vehicles based in the territory of the respective Member State, and do not require the vehicle to stop.

Amendment 89 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

1a. For the purposes of carrying out checks on insurance, as referred to in paragraph 1, a Member State shall grant other Member States access to the following national vehicle registration data, with the power to conduct automated searches thereon: (a) data on whether a vehicle is covered by a compulsory insurance; (b) data relating to owners or holders of the vehicle which is relevant to their insurance against civil liability subject to Article 3. Access to those data shall be granted through the Member States’ national contact points, as designated pursuant to Article 4(2) of Directive (EU) 2015/413*. __________________ * Directive (EU) 2015/413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2015 facilitating cross- border exchange of information on road- safety-related traffic offences (OJ L 68, 13.3.2015, p. 9)

Amendment 90 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) for personal injuries: EUR 610 0700 000 per accident, irrespective of the number of victims, or EUR ~~1 22~~2 000 000 per victim;

Amendment 91 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

(3a) In Article 10, the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 is amended as follows: 1. Each Member State shall set up or authorise a body with the task of providing compensation, of at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation referred to in Article 9(1) or the guarantee limits prescribed by the Member State, if higher, for damage to property or personal injuries caused by an unidentified vehicle or a vehicle for which the insurance obligation provided for in Article 3 has not been satisfied.

Amendment 93 #

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

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

(3a) In Article 10, the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 is amended as follows: 1. Each Member State shall set up or authorise a body with the task of providing compensation, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation for damage to property or personal injuries caused by an unidentified vehicle or a vehicle for which the insurance obligation provided for in Article 3 has not been satisfied, including with respect to incidents where a motor vehicle is used as a weapon to commit a violent crime or terrorist act.

Amendment 94 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Member States shall set up or authorise a body to compensate injured parties habitually residing within their territory, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation referred to in Article 9(1) or the guarantee limits prescribed by the Member State, if higher, for personal injuries or material damage, caused by a vehicle insured by an insurance undertaking in any of the following situations:

Amendment 95 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Each Member States shall set up or authorise a body to compensate injured parties habitually residing within their territory, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation referred to in Article 9(1) for personal injuries or material damage, caused by a vehicle insured by an insurance undertaking in any of the following situations:

Amendment 96 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the insurance undertaking or its claims representative has not provided a reasoned reply to the points made in a claim for compensation within ~~three months~~a reasonable period of time after the date on which the injured party presented his or her claim to that insurance undertaking.

Amendment 97 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 2

2. Injured parties may not present a claim to the body referred to in paragraph 1 if they have presented a claim directly ~~to or taken legal action directly~~ against the insurance undertaking and such claim ~~or legal action~~ is still pending.

Amendment 98 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 3

3. The body referred to in paragraph 1 shall give a reply to the claim within t~~wo month~~hirty days after the date on which the injured party has presented his or her claim for compensation.

Amendment 99 #