4 Amendments of Marlene MIZZI related to 2018/0090(COD)
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Transparency requirements for online marketplaces need to be robust enough to protect the consumer even after the consumer is bound by a distance or off- premises contract, or any corresponding offer if additional essential information becomes available after the sale. Consumers should of course be protected from buying or using illegal goods, which may pose a threat to their health or safety, and be allowed to exercise any available remedies, including through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms provided for in Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. They should therefore be informed when they have bought an illegal product or in the event the offer was misleading. Online marketplaces do not always know when an offer or a product is illegal. However, when they become aware of such information after the sale, they should share it not only with the sellers but also with the buyers. Such a requirement is in line with Directive 2000/31/EC, since it would only apply once an online marketplace has received a notice, confirmed its validity, and proceeded with the takedown of the illegal offer or product. Therefore, it does not change in any way the liability regime provided for in Directive 2000/31/EC, since the online marketplace has been made aware of an illegal activity or information stored on its online interface. Similarly, it would not impose any general monitoring obligation, but only to act upon receipt and processing of a valid notice. _____________ 1a Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR) (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 63).
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) While off-premises sales constitute a legitimate and well-established sales channel, like sales at a trader's business premises and distance–selling, some particularly aggressive or misleading marketing practices in the context of visits to the consumer's home without the consumer's prior agreement or during commercial excursions can put consumers under pressure to make purchases of goods they would not otherwise buy and/or purchases at excessive prices, often involving immediate payment. Such practices often target elderly or other vulnerable consumers. Some Member States consider those practices undesirable and deem it necessary to restrict certain forms and aspects of off- premises sales within the meaning of Directive 2011/83/EU, such as aggressive and misleading marketing or selling of a product in the context of unsolicited visits to a consumer's home or commercial excursions, on grounds of public policy or the respect for consumers’ private life protected by Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and in order to facilitate enforcement, it should therefore be clarified that Directive 2005/29/EC is without prejudice to Member States' freedom to make arrangements without the need for a case-by-case assessment of the specific practice, to protect the legitimate interests of consumers with regard to unsolicited visits at their private home by a trader in order to offer or sell products or in relationIn accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and in order to facilitate enforcement, it should therefore be clarified that Directive 2005/29/EC is without prejudice to Member States' freedom to make arrangements to protect the legitimate interests of consumers with regard to commercial excursions organised by a trader with the aim or effect of promoting or selling products to consumers where such arrangements are justified on grounds of public policy or the protection of private life. Any such provisions should be proportionate and not discriminatory. Member States should be required to notify any national provisions adopted in this regard to the Commission so that the Commission can make this information available to all interested parties and monitorexamine the proportionate nature and legality of those measures.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
This Directive does not prevent Member States from adopting provisions to protect the legitimate interests of consumers with regard to aggressive or misleading marketing or selling practices in the context of unsolicited visits by a trader to a consumer's home, or with regard tospecifically defined commercial practices that are identified as aggressive or misleading in the context of commercial excursions organised by a trader with the aim or effect of promoting or selling products to consumers, provided that such provisions are justified on grounds of public policy or the protection of the respect for private lifeproportionate, non- discriminatory and justified by overriding reasons in the public interest.
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 b (new)
Article 6 b (new)
(4a) The following Article 6b is inserted: “Article 6b Information requirements for offers considered to be illegal Where the offer for the good or service that has been sold was notified to and removed by the online marketplace on ground that it is illegal after the consumer is bound by a distance or off-premises contract, or any corresponding offer, on an online marketplace, the online marketplace shall promptly provide the following information to the consumer in a clear and comprehensible manner: (a) that the product sold to them or the offer thereof is illegal or apparently illegal and was removed; (b) the identity of the seller that placed the offer, which was removed; (c) the reason why the offer is considered to be illegal or apparently illegal was removed.”