Activities of Matthijs van MILTENBURG related to 2018/0089(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers (debate) NL
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC
Amendments (24)
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive aims at minimum harmonisation and shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions designed to grant qualified entities or any other persons concerned other procedural means to bring actions aimed at the protection of the collective interests of consumers at national level.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Directive is to enable qualified entities, which represent the collective interest of consumers, to seek remedy through representative actions against infringements of provisions of Union law. The qualified entities should be abentitled to askdemand for stopping or prohibiting an infringement, for confirming that an infringement took place and to seek redress, such as compensation, repair or price reduction as available under national laws.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. A redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to Article 4(4), Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are able to seek the measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement together with measures referred to in paragraph 2 within a single representative action.
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) As only qualified entities can bring the representative actions, to ensure that the collective interests of consumers are adequately represented the qualified entities should comply with the criteria established by this Directive. In particular, they would need to be properly constituted according to the law of a Member State, which could include for example requirements regarding the number of members, the degree of permanence, or transparency requirements on relevant aspects of their structure such as their constitutive statutes, management structure, objectives and working methods. They should also be not for profit and have a legitimate interest in ensuring compliance with the relevant Union law. These criteria should apply to both qualified entities designated in advance and to ad hoc qualified entities that are constituted for the purpose of a specific action.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the court or administrative authority shall require the infringing traderqualified entity to inform affected consumers at its expense about the final decisions providing for measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, and the approved settlements referred to in Article 8, by means appropriate to the circumstance of the case and within specified time limits, including, where appropriate, through notifying all consumers concerned individually.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, at the request of a qualified entity that has presented reasonably available facts and evidence sufficient to support the representative action, and has indicated further evidence which lies in the control of the defendant, the court or administrative authority may order, in accordance with national procedural rules, that such evidence be presented by the defendant, that such evidence be presented by the defendant. This order should be based on an assessment of the need, scope and proportionality of the requested disclosure, in accordance with national procedural rules and subject to the applicable Union and national rules on confidentiality.
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Member States should be allowed to decide whether their court or national authority seized of a representative action for redress may exceptionally issue, instead of a redress order, a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement which could be directly relied upon in subsequent redress actions by individual consumers. This possibility should be reserved to strictly exceptional and duly justified cases where the quantification of the individual redress to be attributed to each of the consumer concerned by the representative action is extremely complex and it would be inefficient to carry it out within the representative action. Declaratory decisions should not be issued in situations which are not extremely complex and in particular where consumers concerned are identifiable and where the consumers have suffered a comparable harm in relation to a period of time or a purchase. Similarly, declaratory decisions should not be issued where the amount of loss suffered by each of the individual consumers is so small that individual consumers are unlikely to claim for individual redress. The court or the national authority should duly motivate its recourse to a declaratory decision instead of a redress order in a particular case.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To enhance legal certainty, avoid inconsistency in the application of Union law and to increase the effectiveness and procedural efficiency of representative actions and of possible follow-on actions for redress, the finding of an infringement established in a final decision, including a final injunction order under this Directive, issued by an administrative authority or a court should not be relitigated in subsequent legal actions related to the same infringement by the same trader as regards the nature of the infringement and its material, personal, temporal and territorial scope as determined by that final decision. Where an action seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement, including for redress, is brought in a Member State other than the Member State where a final decision establishing this infringement was issued, the decision should constitute at least a rebuttable presumption that the infringement has occurred.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive aims at minimum harmonisation and shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions designed to grant qualified entities or any other persons concerned other procedural means to bring actions aimed at the protection of the collective interests of consumers at national level.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) it is, at all times, fully transparent about the source of funding of its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) a redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to Article 4(4), Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are able to seek the measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement together with measures referred to in paragraph 2 within a single representative action.
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. By derogation to paragraph 1, Member States may empower a court or administrative authority to issue, instead of a redress order, a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I, in. This derogation may apply only in strictly exceptional and duly justified cases where, due to the characteristics of the individual harm to the consumers concerned the quantification of individual redress is extremely complex.
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) a court or administrative authority determined that consumers have suffered a small amount of loss and it would be disproportionate to distribute the redress to them. In such cases, Member States shall ensure that the mandate of the individual consumers concerned is not required. The redress shall be directed to a public purpose serving the collective interests of consumers.
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The qualified entity seeking a redress order as referred in Article 6(1) shall declare at an early stage of the action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action. It shall demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to represent the best interests of the consumers concerned and to meet any adverse costs should the action fail.
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a final decision referred to in paragraph 1, taken in another Member State is considered by their national courts or administrative authorities at least as a rebuttable presumption that an infringement has occurred.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, at the request of a qualified entity that has presented reasonably available facts and evidence sufficient to support the representative action, and has indicated further evidence which lies in the control of the defendant, the court or administrative authority may order, in accordance with national procedural rules, that such evidence be presented by the defendant, that such evidence be presented by the defendant. This decision should be based on an assessment of the need, scope and proportionality of the requested disclosure, in accordance with national procedural rules, and subject to the applicable Union and national rules on confidentiality.
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that any qualified entity designated in advance in one Member State in accordance with Article 4(1) may apply to the courts or administrative authorities of another Member State upon the presentation of the publicly available list referred to in that Article. The courts or administrative authorities shall accept this list as proof of the legal standing of the qualified entity without prejudice to their right to examine whether the purpose of the qualified entity justifies its taking action in a specific case.
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that where the infringement affects or is likely to affect consumers from different Member States the representative action may be brought to the competent court or administrative authority of a Member State by several qualified entities from different Member States, acting jointly or represented by a single qualified entity, for the protection of the collective interest of consumers from different Member States. In order to ensure efficient cross-border representative action, Member States may ask the European Commission for coordination.