Work on the proposal for a Directive which, for the first time, will establish minimum criteria in the European Union offering consumers deliberately harmed by unfair practices by a company collective redress procedures to obtain reparation, including before the courts, is progressing at a technical level.
Interrupted by the coronavirus crisis, interinstitutional negotiations between the European Parliament and the EU Council have not been able to take place since March (see EUROPE 12434/7).
A constructive discussion took place on 3 June in the EU Council working party on the basis of a compromise proposal from the Croatian Presidency on Articles 1 to 13 of the Directive. But we’re still a long way from an agreement.
“Fears were expressed by some delegations regarding the safeguarding of procedural autonomy, which is very dear to some Member States. Some delegations would have asked for an impact assessment on the information/transparency requirements proposed by Parliament”, a diplomatic source explained to EUROPE.
The next meeting is scheduled for June 10. Then, on the basis of the state of negotiations, the Croatian Presidency of the EU Council will decide on the follow-up to be given. If the trilogue meeting on 22 June is maintained, Coreper would be asked on 17 June to prepare it. “At this stage, it is difficult to say whether we will conclude under the Croatian Presidency”, the source said.
However, business, trade and insurance representatives fear that the Croatian Presidency is aiming for an agreement without a new trilogue. In a joint statement issued on 3 June, BusinessEurope, Eurochambres, Eurocommerce, EDIM and SMEUnited call for this “crucial” legislation not to be sacrificed on the altar of haste.
“We ask Member States and the European Parliament to continue to deliberate and to address the many remaining issues and to not easily succumb to the pressures of finding a compromise at any cost under tight last-minute deadlines. Doing so will undoubtedly lead to a situation in which the many complexities of this proposal will not be adequately considered”, write the organisations. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)