16 Amendments of Angelo CIOCCA related to 2018/0082(COD)
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) While business risk is inherent in all economic activity, agricultural production is particularly fraught with uncertainty due to its reliance on biological processes, since agricultural products are to a greater or lesser extent perishable and seasonable, and its exposure to weather conditions, price volatility and changing geopolitical situations, which can cause huge disruptions to a specific sector (in particular, via trade preferences and embargos, etc.). In an agricultural policy environment that is distinctly more market- oriented than in the past, protection against unfair trading practices has become moreis currently of paramount important force to operators active in the food supply chain and in particular forto agricultural producers and their organisations.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) A majority of all Member States, but not all of them, have specific national rules that protect suppliers against unfair trading practices occurring in business-to- business relationships in the food supply chain. Where reliance on contract law or self-regulatory initiatives is possible, fear of financial, trade or contractual retaliation against a complainant limits the practical value of these forms of redress. Certain Member States, which have specific rules on unfair trading practices in place, therefore entrust administrative authorities with their enforcement. However, Member States’ unfair trading practices rules - to the extent they exist - are characterised by significant divergence, and are not enough to provide effective and uniform protection to European producers.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Suppliers established outside the Union should be able to rely on the Union minimum standard, together with the (possibly stricter) standard of the Member State in which they would like to sell their products, when they sell food products to buyers established in the Union to avoid unintended distorting effects resulting from the protection of suppliers in the Union.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
( 10) As a majority of Member States already have national rules on unfair trading practices, albeit diverging, it is appropriate to use the tool of a Directive to introduce a minimum protection standard under Union law. This should enable Member States to integrate the relevant rules into their national legal order in such a way as to bring about a cohesive regime. Member States should not be precluded from adopting and applying on their territory stricter national laws protecting small and medium-sized supplieragricultural producers, producer organisations and buyers against unfair trading practices occurring in business-to- business relationships in the food supply chain, subject to the limits of Union law applicable to the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) As unfair trading practices may occur at any stage of the sale of a food product, i.e. before, during or after a sales transaction, in relation to the provision of services by the buyer, or group of buyers, to the supplier, Member States should ensure that the provisions of this Directive should apply to such practices whenever they occur.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive
Article premier – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article premier – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This directive gives Member States the right, where relevant, to establish a list of contentious but permitted practices that may be foreseen in clear and unambiguous terms in supply agreements between the parties.
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) “food products” means products listed in Annex I to the Treaty intended for use as food, and any product arising from the work of, or service provided by, a supplier, as well as products not listed in that Annex, but processed from those products for use as food;
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
(de) a buyer carries out communication or promotional activities or implements commercial policies which risk being detrimental to the image of products bearing a geographical indication pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 or Regulation (EU) No 251/2014;
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(dc) a buyer does not inform the supplier of any different treatment the buyer gives, or intends to give, to competitor brands owned or managed by that buyer. Such difference in treatment shall include at least any specific measures or conduct on the part of the buyer in relation to: (a) listings, (b) shelf space and (c) trade margins;
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the partial or total reduction of purchases under existing contracts for the purpose of imposing a change to an existing contract or negotiating a new contract;
Amendment 408 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(db) a buyer shares with third parties, or uses improperly, be it intentionally or negligently, confidential information relating to a supply agreement, including trade secrets shared by the supplier with the buyer;
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(dd) a buyer implements forms of trade reprisals against a supplier, where the latter exercises his contractual and legal rights, including the lodging of complaints and cooperation with national law-enforcement authorities;
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The costs of the services that derive from the performance of the supply agreement by the buyer shall be clearly set out within that agreement and determined strictly in accordance with the service provided; they may not, furthermore, under any circumstances, reflect a state of economic dependence of the supplier on the buyer, which would enable the latter to impose such terms unilaterally.
Amendment 579 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Where the enforcement authority considers that there are insufficient grounds for acting on a complaint, it shall inform only the complainant about the reasons. The complainant shall be notified of the rejection in line with the laws of the Member State in which the enforcement authority is established. This notification should mention that the complainant can appeal the decision within a suitable time limit, under the laws of the Member State in which the enforcement authority is established.
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The competent authority referred to in the previous paragraphs shall also be competent to investigate unfair trading practices relating to the supply of services connected to the supply agreement. The buyer and, where appropriate, the third- party recipient of the goods, shall be held jointly liable for any infringements committed by a third-party supplier of the relevant services.
Amendment 604 #
(d) to impose a substantial pecuniary fine on the author of the infringement. The fine shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive taking into account the nature, duration and gravity of the infringement;. The fine should make it possible for the complainant to return its finances to what they were before the offence was committed. The complainant can also claim moral damages if the offence has undermined the complainant's interests, harmed its brand image or caused damage other than commercial damage alone.