[ParlTrack]

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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 able to ask for stopping or prohibiting an infringement, and for confirming that an infringement took place ~~and to seek redress, such as compensation, repair or price reduction as available under national laws~~.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) Independent public bodies and consumer organisations in particular should play an active role in ensuring compliance with relevant provisions of Union law and are all well placed to act as qualified entities. Since these entities have access to different sources of information regarding traders' practices towards consumers and hold different priorities for their activities, Member States should be free to decide on the types of measures that may be sought by each of these qualified entities in representative actions.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) To increase the procedural effectiveness of representative actions, qualified entities should have the possibility to seek different measures within a single representative action or within separate representative actions. These measures should include interim measures for stopping an ongoing practice or prohibiting a practice in case the practice has not been carried out but there is a risk that it would cause serious or irreversible harm to consumers, measures establishing that a given practice constitutes an infringement of law and, if necessary, stopping or prohibiting the practice for the future, as well as measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement~~, including redress~~. If sought within a single action, qualified entities should be able to seek all relevant measures at the moment of bringing the action or first seek relevant injunctions order and subsequently and if appropriate ~~redress~~declaratory order.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16

(16) Qualified entities should be able to seek measures aimed at eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. These measures should take the form of a redress order obligating the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate and as available under national laws.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18

(18) Member States may require qualified entities to provide sufficient information to support a representative action for redress, including a description of the group of consumers concerned by an infringement and the questions of fact and law to be resolved within the representative action. The qualified entity should not be required to individually identify all consumers concerned by an infringement in order to initiate the action. In representative actions for redress the court or administrative authority should verify at the earliest possible stage of the proceedings whether the case is suitable for being brought as a representative action, given the nature of the infringement and characteristics of the damages suffered by consumers concerned.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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 duly justified cases where the quantification of the individual redress to be attributed to each of the consumer concerned by the representative action is 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 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.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20

(20) Where consumers concerned by the same practice are identifiable and they suffered comparable harm in relation to a period of time or a purchase, such as in the case of long-term consumer contracts, the court or administrative authority may clearly define the group of consumers concerned by the infringement in the course of the representative action. In particular, the court or administrative authority could ask the infringing trader to provide relevant information, such as the identity of the consumers concerned and the duration of the practice. For expediency and efficiency reasons, in these cases Member States in accordance with their national laws could consider to provide consumers with the possibility to directly benefit from a redress order after it was issued without being required to give their individual mandate before the redress order is issued.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21

(21) In low-value cases most consumers are unlikely to take action in order to enforce their rights because the efforts would outweigh the individual benefits. However, if the same practice concerns a number of consumers, the aggregated loss may be significant. In such cases, a court or authority may consider that it is disproportionate to distribute the funds back to the consumers concerned, for example because it is too onerous or impracticable. Therefore the funds received as redress through representative actions would better serve the purposes of the protection of collective interests of consumers and should be directed to a relevant public purpose, such as a consumer legal aid fund, awareness campaigns or consumer movements.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27

(27) Member States may provide that a qualified entity and a trader who have reached a settlement regarding redress for consumers affected by an allegedly illegal practice of that trader can jointly request a court or administrative authority to approve it. Such request should be admitted by the court or administrative authority only if there is no other ongoing representative action regarding the same practice. A competent court or administrative authority approving such collective settlement must take into consideration the interests and rights of all parties concerned, including individual consumers. ~~Individual consumers concerned shall be given the possibility to accept or to refuse to be bound by such a settlement.~~

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30

(30) Any out-of-court settlement reached within the context of a representative action or based on a final declaratory decision should be approved by the relevant court or the administrative authority to ensure its legality and fairness, taking into consideration the interests and rights of all parties concerned. ~~Individual consumers concerned shall be given the possibility to accept or to refuse to be bound by such a settlement.~~

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31

(31) Ensuring that consumers are informed about a representative action is crucial for its success. Consumers should be informed of ongoing representative action, the fact that a trader's practice has been considered as a breach of law, their rights following the establishment of an infringement and any subsequent steps to be taken by consumers concerned, particularly for obtaining redress. ~~The reputational risks associated with spreading information about the infringement are also important for deterring traders infringing consumer rights.~~

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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 a rebuttable presumption that the infringement has occurred.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37

(37) Evidence is an important element for establishing whether a given practice constitutes an infringement of law, whether there is a risk of its repetition, for determining the consumers concerned by an infringement, deciding on redress and adequately informing consumers concerned by a representative action about the ongoing proceedings and its final outcomes. However, business-to-consumer relationships are characterised by information asymmetry and the necessary information may be held exclusively by the trader, making it inaccessible to the qualified entity. Qualified entities should therefore be afforded the right to request to the competent court or administrative authority the disclosure by the trader of evidence relevant to their claim or needed for adequately informing consumers concerned about the representative action~~, without it being necessary for them to specify individual items of evidence~~. The need, scope and proportionality of such disclosure should be carefully assessed by the court or administrative authority overseeing the representative action having regard to the protection of legitimate interests of third parties and subject to the applicable Union and national rules on confidentiality.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Othmar KARAS, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Directive sets out rules enabling qualified entities to seek representative actions aimed at the protection of the collective interests of consumers, while ensuring appropriate safeguards at EU and Member State level and their consistent EU-wide application to avoid abusive litigation.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

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

(3) ‘collective interests of consumers’ means the ~~interests~~general interest of consumers independent of athe number of consumers concerned by the case in question;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

(6 a) 'CPC entity' shall refer to the 'competent authority' as defined by Regulaiton (EU) 2917/2394 of the European Parliament and Council on Cooperation between national authorities responsbile for the enforcement of consumer protection laws.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – title

4 ~~Qualified entiti~~Entities qualified for Article 5 measures and entities qualified for Article 6 measures

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

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

Member States shall ensure that representative actions ~~can~~referred to in Article 5 and in Article 6 of this Directive can only be brought by qualified entities designated, at their request, by the Member States in advance for this purpose and placed in a publicly available list. These entities shall be certified and supervised by the CPC entity.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

~~Member States shall~~CPC entities may designate an entity as a qualified entity for Article 5 measures if it complies with the following criteria:

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b

(b) it ~~has a legitimate interest in~~s statutes, governance and track record demonstrate its legitimate interest in protecting consumers and ensuring that provisions of Union law covered by this Directive are complied with;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c

(c) it has a non-profit making character. and a governance structure providing complete independence from third parties and ensuring that no excessive salaries or office costs or other expenses are paid just to fulfill the non-profit criterion, nor is it a vehicle for pursuing litigation for profit controlled by others;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)

(c a) it has sufficient capacity in terms of human resources, and legal expertise to represent multiple claimants acting in their best interest;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c b (new)

(c b) it has in place due procedures to identify, prevent and deal with conflicts of interests;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c c (new)

(c c) it has existed for at least 2 years before initiating a representative action.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

CPC entities may designate an entity as a qualified entity for Article 6 measures if it complies with the following criteria: a) the entity is an independent body, appointed by and accountable to the CPC authority and tasked with protecting the interests of consumers; b) in addition to being a not-for-profit entity, the actions taken by entities for Article 6 measures must be funded exclusively from the entity's own resources without a third party funder or legal representative having a financial interest in the specific outcome of the action; c) the entity's governance structure makes clear that it serves the interests of consumers, rather than any third party, and that it has demonstrated the capacity, knowledge, experience, and ability to serve the interests of the consumers in question over a period of at least two years; d) the entity has the know-how, human and financial resources and ability to conduct the litigation in question efficiently and in the interests of consumers; e) the entity has clearly communicated any costs and risks to those consumers before acting on their behalf; f) the entity has existed for at least 4 years before initiating a declaratory action.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Member States' CPC entities shall assess on a regular basis whether a qualified entity continues to comply with these criteria. Member States shall ensure that the qualified entity loses its status under this Directive if it no longer complies with one or more of the criteria listed in the first subparagraph.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2

~~2. Member States may designate a qualified entity on an ad hoc basis for a particular representative action, at its request, if it complies with the criteria referred to in paragraph 1.~~deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall ensure that in particular consumer organisations and independent public bodies are eligible for the status of qualified entity. Member States may designate as qualified entities consumer organisations that represent members from more than one Member State.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4

4. Member States may set out rules specifying which qualified entities may seek all of the measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, and which qualified entities may seek only one or more of these measures.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5

5. TWithout predjudice to the compliance by a qualified entity with the criteria ~~referred to in paragraph 1 is without prejud~~laid down in Article ~~to the right of~~4, the court or administrative authority toshall examine whether the purpose of the qualified entity justifies its taking action in a specific case in accordance with Article 5(1) or Article 6(1) of this Directive.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Member States shall ensure that representative actions can be brought before national courts or administrative authorities by qualified entities provided that there is a direct relationship between the main objectives of the entity and the rights granted under Union law that are claimed to have been violated in respect of which the action is brought.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that representative actions can be brought before national courts or administrative authorities by qualified entities provided that there is a direct relationship between the main objectives of the entity and the rights granted under Union law that are claimed to have been violated in respect of which the action is brought.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

In order to seek injunction orders, qualified entities shall ~~not have to obtain~~demonstrate that they have the mandate of at least 10 of the individual consumers concerned or, but shall not be required to provide proof of actual loss or damage on the part of the consumers concerned ~~or of intention or negligence on the part of the trader~~.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall ensure that ~~qualified entiti~~only entities qualified for Article 6 measures are entitled to bring representative actions seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. These measures shall be sought on the basis of any final decision establishing that a practice constitutes an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I harming collective interests of consumers, including a final injunction order referred to in paragraph (2)(b)a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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~~which are eligible to bring actions under Article 6 are able to seek a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I together with measures referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article within a single representative action, provided the identity of all individuals seeking redress is known to the court before its judgment.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Member States shall ensure that the 'loser pays' principle applies for all types of representative actions.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title

~~Redress~~Declaratory measures

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

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

For the purposes of Article 5(3), Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking a redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensatMember States shall ensure that entities designated by the CPC authorities to be qualified to bring measures under Article 6 are entitled to bring representative actions seeking a declaratory decision, repair, replacement, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate. A Member State may require the mandate of the individual consumers concerned before a declaratory decision is made or a redress order is issuedgarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Member States shall ensure that the 'loser pays' principle applies for all types of representative actions.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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 duly justified cases where, due to the characteristics of the individual harm to the consumers concerned the quantification of individual redress is complex.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. Paragraph 2 shall not apply in the cases where: (a) consumers concerned by the infringement are identifiable and suffered comparable harm caused by the same practice in relation to a period of time or a purchase. In such cases the requirement of the mandate of the individual consumers concerned shall not constitute a condition to initiate the action. The redress shall be directed to the consumers concerned; (b) 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.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4

4. The redress obtained through a final decision in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be without prejudice to any additional rights to redress that the consumers concerned may have under Union or national law.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. The ~~qualified entity seeking a redress order as referred in Article 6(1)~~entity qualified for Article 5 actions shall declare at ~~an early~~the stage of ~~the action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support th~~admissibility of the action if it uses any funds to support the representative 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.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(a a) to receive any direct or indirect financial benefit through the litigation process or decision;

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6

6. Individual consumers concerned shall be given the possibility to accept or to refuse to be bound by settlements referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3. The redress obtained through an approved settlement in accordance with paragraph 4 shall be without prejudice to any additional rights to redress that the consumers concerned may have under Union or national lawThe redress obtained through an approved settlement in accordance with paragraph 4 must be definitive and applicable to all cases involving the same practice, the same consumers and the same company.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that the court or administrative authority shall require the infringing trader 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.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. All costs the trader incurs due to the information obligation shall be at the trader's charge only to the extent that the outcome is favourable for the claimant group. Otherwise, the claimant group shall reimburse the trader for the costs.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that an infringement harming collective interests of consumers established in a final decision of an administrative authority or a court, including a final injunction order referred to in Article 5(2)(b), is deemed as irrefutably establishing the existence of that infringement for the purposes of any other actions seeking redress before their national courts against the same trader for the same infringement.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA

Proposal for a directive
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 as a rebuttable presumption that an infringement has occurrdeleted.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall ensure that a final declaratory decision referred to in Article 6~~(2)~~ is deemed as irrefutably establishing the liability of the trader towards the harmed consumers by an infringement for the purposes of any actions seeking redress before their national courts against the same trader for that infringement. Member States shall ensure that such actions for redress brought individually by consumers are available through expedient and simplified procedures.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1

In accordance with national law, Member States shall ensure that the submission of a representative action as referred to in Articles 5 and 6 shall have the effect of suspending or interrupting limitation periods applicable to any redress actions for the consumers concerned, if the relevant rights are subject to a limitation period under Union or national law.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
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, provided such information is precisely described and narrowly limited to what is proportionate, the court or administrative authority may order, in accordance with national procedural rules, that such evidence be presented by the defendant, subject to the applicable Union and national rules on confidentiality.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that procedural costs related to representative actions do not constitute financial obstacles for qualified entities to effectively exercise the right to seek the measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, such as limiting applicable court or administrative fees, granting them access to legal aid where necessary, or by providing them with public funding for this purpose.deleted

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that ithe party that loses a collective redress action reimburses necessary legal costs borne by the winning party, subject to the conditions provided for in the relevant national law. In cases where the qualified entities are required to inform consumers concerned about the ongoing representative action the related cost may be recovered from the trader if the action is successful.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

Andreas SCHWAB, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Sabine VERHEYEN, Antanas GUOGA, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Proposal for a directive
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.

2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO

56 Amendments of Andreas SCHWAB related to 2018/0089(COD)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024