Activities of Catherine STIHLER related to 2011/2013(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION Green Paper from the Commission on policy options for progress towards a European contract law for consumers and businesses
Amendments (45)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the European Contract Law project indispensablecould be necessary for realising the full potential of the internal market, entailing substantial economic and employment benefits; However an impact assessment providing the factual basis for progress in the field of contract law shall be conducted;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas contract law is at the heart of all national rules governing the behaviour of businesses and consumers in their markets; whereas the internal market remains fragmented, owing to the existence of 27 different legal systems and the risks and costs inherent in cross- border transactions,greater study is needed to further understand why the internal market remains fragmented and how best to address these problems including how to ensure implementation of existing legislation such as the Directive on services in the internal market (2006/123/EC)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that EU-level harmonisation of contract law practices would be more efficient in ensuring convergence and a more level playing field, but that, given the challenges of harmonising national legal systems, an optional instrument is a more proportionate andshould be considered as a feasible solution, ats least as an interim measureong as it implies an added value to both consumers and businesses;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point a (new)
Paragraph 2 – point a (new)
(a) Considers that other policy options should be assessed as well in order to establish which is the appropriate tool according to the needs of a single market at the service of consumers and businesses;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point b (new)
Paragraph 2 – point b (new)
(b) The impact assessment should especially investigate whether the harmonization of European contract law would really bring added value to businesses, in particular SMEs , and to look into the costs harmonization would incur;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers thatwhether such an instrument should be based on the Lex Generalis principle of prescribing general provisions with the widest possible scope and that, to avoid unfair competition within the internal market, the instrument should cover both e-commerce and other commercial activities, and both business-to-consumer and business-to-business relationships;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas it is clear that the application of foreign (consumer) law to cross-border transactions under the Rome-I Regulation*3 has been seen to entail considerable transaction costs for businesses, in particular for SMEs, which have been estimated at €15 000 per business and per 1 UK Federation of Small Businesses, Position paper on Rome I (2007). 2 OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6. 3 OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6. Member State*1,
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to ensure close alignment of the proposed Consumer Rights Directive and theany potential European Contract Law instrument so as to clarify the relationship between the two measures in such a way that in case of conflict the national consumer rights legislation takes precedence, and a high level of consumer protection is ensured;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in its Green Paper1 the Commission sets out a range of options for a European contract law instrument which could help the EU to recover from the economic crisis, develop entrepreneurship and strengthen public confidence in the Sinternal mgle Market,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas this needs verifying in the light of the application of Article 6(2) and Article 4(1), point (a) of the Rome-I Regulation, which allows businesses to apply their national law, bearing in mind that Rome I has only been applied since December 2009;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the negotiations on the consumer protection directive2 illustrated just how difficult it is to fully harmonise contract lawsumer law as applied to contracts due to its complexities without undermining the common commitment to a high level of consumer protection in Europe and what limits this imposes on the process,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas such transaction costs are perceived as important obstacles to cross- border trade, as confirmed by 60 % of EU retailers interviewed in 20081 , and whereas 46 % said harmonised rules would help to increasebeing one of the obstacles to cross-border sales,trade;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas it is of paramount importance that any initiative from the EU will have to answer real needs and concerns of both businesses and consumers; whereas these concerns also extend to legal/linguistic problems (provisions of standard terms and conditions for small businesses in all EU languages) and the difficulties in enforcing contracts across borders (provisions of autonomous EU measures in the field of procedural law);
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas theany end product, a in the field of European Contract Law, must be realistic, feasible, proportionate and properly thought through prior to being amended, if necessary, and formally adopted by the European co-legislator if this process is to enjoy political legitimacy and supports,
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas there is evidence that the online market remains fragmented: in a survey, 61 % of 10 964 test cross-border orders failed, inter alia because traders refused to serve the consumer's country1; whereas, on the other hand,a Commission study revealed that 61 % of 10 964 test cross-border orders failed and that cross-border shopping appears to increase consumers' chances of finding a cheaper offer*2 and of finding products not available domestically online*,3, whereas the figure of 61% seems to be very high and to warrant further study, verification and assessment;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomStresses the need for an open debate on all the policy options included in the Green Paper and urges the relevant Commission departments to carry out a thorough analysis of the outcome of this consultation process; further stresses the need for a thorough impact assessment to determine how all parties, including SMEs, will be impacted and detailed estimates of the cost of implementation of each Commission proposal;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas any steps taken in the area of European contract law must be cohernsistent with the expected Consumer Rights Directive, which will have a significant impact on the content and on the level of harmonisation of a possible future instrument in the field of European Contract Law; whereas it would be necessary to constantly and carefully monitor its implementation in the next months in order to define which should be the scope of the OI;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Looks forward to the publication of the Expert Group's results in order to clarify the scope and the congoing discussiontent of the OI and in order to engage in an open and transparent discussion with all stakeholders as to how these results should be used and as the Commission would consider additional options, less intrusive than the OI, for facilitating cross-border activities; calls for the creation of "European standard contracts models", translated in all EU languages, linked to an ADR system, carried out on line, which would have the advantages of being a cost-effective and simpler solution for both contractual parties and the Commission;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the development of an optional European Contract Law could do much toolbox, to create more consistent and coherent legislation and standard contract terms and conditions, could be a proportionate and realistic method to improve the functioning of the Sinternal market and that Parliament and the Council should have final responsibility for determining its legal form and scopegle Market; Recalls that there are many other practical barriers to cross-border trade, including language, delivery cost, consumer preference and culture, which cannot be resolved by contract law;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the contents of the toolbox and to consider complementing the OI by "model contract terms and conditions" for small businesses, translated into all languages; further calls on the Commission to expand the range of autonomous cross- border procedural instruments so as to facilitate the enforcement of cross-border transactions;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that a commonAwaits the evidence to prove that an initiative on a European Contract Law would make the internal market more efficient without affecting Member States' national systems of contract law;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that it needs to be further considered if Articles 114 and 169 or 352 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union would constitute the appropriate legal basis for an instrument regulating business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) contracts;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises the particular importance of facilitating e-commerce in the EU, given that this sector is underdeveloped, as a result of differences between national contract law systems, and has rightly been identified by businesses and consumers as a potential motor for and stresses that it is necessary to assess whether differences between national contract law systems could represent an obstacle to future growth;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that individuessential components of consumer law applied to contract laws are already spread across various sets of European rules, soand that it would make sense to consolidate them into a European Contract Law; points out, further, that these existing sets of rules illustrate the need for a clearly structured,mportant parts of the consumer acquis are likely to be consolidated in the Consumer Rights Directive; points out that the aforementioned Directive would provide a uniform body of law which consumers and businesses can readily identify; therefore, stresses the importance of waiting until the outcome of the Consumer Rights negotiations before any recommendation is made;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the advantages of such an instrument for both consumers and businesses;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Is concerned about the confusion the additional set of rules would create for SMEs, but, in particular, for consumers, bearing in mind that in order to enforce their rights consumers have to be aware of them;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Insists that the legislation creating the OI be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure and that the optional instrument itself be subject to scrutiny and amendment under that procedure;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that the regulatory focus of a potential European Contract Law initiative should be the principles underpinning contracts: in the case of consumer contracts, the focus should be on the law governing sales and, where appropriate, service and works contracts and the general provisions should contain rules on the definition of a contract, pre-contractual obligations, the procedures for concluding contracts, representation, grounds of nullity, that such an instrument should not prevent consumers from the protection granted by existing rules of private interpretnation of contracts, the performance of contracts, rights and obligations, in particular warranty rights, under a contract, the right of withdrawal, termination, statutory limitation, etc.;al law (Rome I and Rome II regulations).
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that both business-to-business and business-to-consumer contracts should be covered; emphasises that the level of consumer protection would need to be high, as mandatory national provnd wishes for an explanation as to how this can be achievable; calls upon the Commissions, including to bear in mind the area of consumer law, wat a satisfactory solution must be foulnd be replacedto problems of private international law;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is convinced that the lany initiative in the field of European Contract Law should be balanced, simple, clear, transparent and user-friendly and not employ vague legal terms, so that European consumers in particular can understand it, although due account should be taken of the potential interests of both (or all) parties to a given contract;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that for consumers must give their explicit consent to the applicationit would be an additional burden and in order to make an informed choice, knowledge of the European law and that the relevant provisions must not be introduced implicitly, for example by means of standard form contractstwo sets of contract law would be necessary; unless explained in simple terms with pros and cons of both options stated it would not be possible for consumers to make a meaningful choice;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Sees no reason why anBelieves that the OI should not be available as an opt-in both in cross-border and domestic situations, as this would have the advantages of simplicity and cost- saving,in the first instance and until a sufficient esxpecially for the SME sector; believes, however, that the effects of a domestic opt-in on national bodies of contract law merit specific analysirience has been acquired, and then only as an opt-in in cross border situations;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Takes the view that any initiative on European Contract Law in the B2C sphere must establish a very high level of consumer protection and that, should Member States nevertheless guarantee a higher level of protection, the annex to the law should make this explicitly clearconsumers should not be deprived of access to this protection;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that although the supreme test of the effectiveness of any final instrument is the internal market itself;, invites the Commission to consider how best to encourage businessmen and consumers to make use of the new law voluntarilyt must be established beforehand that the initiative represents an added value to consumers and will not complicate cross- border transactions for both consumers and businesses; emphasises the need to include rules on the provision of appropriate information concerning its existence and the way it works to all potential interested parties and stakeholders (including national courts).
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission and the Expert Group to clarify what is to be considered as "core contractual law issues";
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Sees benefits in an OI containing specific provisions for the most frequent types of contract, in particular for the sale of goods and provision of services; reiterates its earlier call to include insurance contracts within the scope of the OI, believing that such an instrument could be particularly useful for small-scale insurance contracts; points out that some specific issues in connection with which an OI might be beneficial have been raised, such as digital rights and beneficial ownership; considers that, on the other hand, there might be a need to exclude certain types of complex public law contracts; in any case believes that the scope of the OI should be limited in the first instance;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Believes that the OI should be coherent with the existing acquis in contract law;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. NoteConsiders that there seems to be a clear constituency among SMEs which is expecting benefits from an OI, with the caveat that it should be drawn up in a OI should be drawn up in a simple, clear and balanced manner which makes it simple and attractive to use for all parties, in particular SMEs and consumers;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that further work on cross- border alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which is speedy and cost-effective in particular for SMEs and consumers, remains a priority, but emphasises that, if the parties use one body of law provided by an OI, ADR will be further facilitated; calls on the Commission to consider synergies when putting forward a proposal; 1 United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Report of Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution)on the work of its twenty-second session (Vienna, 13-17 December 2010), p. 8, 10.
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes concerns that consumers seldom feel they have a choice with regard to contract terms and are confronted with a ‘take it or leave it’ situation; strongly believes that an attractive OI, by opening up business opportunities and strengthening competition, will actually broaden the overall choice available to consumers while ensuring a high level of protection; wishes however for an explanation as to how this high level of protection can be achievable and as to how, at the same time, it would be possible to make the OI attractive to business;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises the vital importance of involving stakeholders from throughout the Union and from different sectors of activity, including legal practitioners and recalls the Commission to undertake a wide and transparent consultation with all the stakeholders before it takes a decision based on the results of the Expert Group;