26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/7 
Opinion on the proposal for a third Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of 
the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor 
vehicles (!) 
(89/C 159/04) 
On 16 January 1989 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee 
under Article 100 A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 5 April 1989. The rapporteur 
was Mr Speirs. 
At its 265th plenary session (meeting of 26 April 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted unanimously with 1 abstention the following Opinion. 
The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal 
subject to the following comments. 
1. General comments 
1.1. The proposed Directive is welcomed in that it 
continues the work undertaken by the first two motor 
insurance Directives, namely to promote the free move­
ment of vehicles and their passengers and to improve 
insurance protection and guarantee fund coverage for 
accident victims throughout the Community. However, 
the wording of certain articles needs to be improved 
for the purposes of clarity. 
1.2. The main provisions of the proposed Directive 
may be summarized as follows: 
a) All passengers, other than the driver and any passen­
gers who have knowingly and willingly entered a 
sloten vehicle, must be given the protection of third 
party insurance cover (some countries do no require 
passenger cover at the present time). 
b) Member States must ensure that third party motor 
insurance policies provide the minimum cover 
required by law in all the Member States. Thus, in 
the future every policy of third party motor 
insurance should, on the basis of a single premium, 
provide cover throughout the Community. 
c) Guarantee funds, set up inter alia to compensate 
the victims of uninsured drivers, must not require 
such victims first to establish that the uninsured 
party although liable to pay compensation is unable 
or unwilling to do so. 
d) In the event of a dispute between an insurer and 
the guarantee fund as to which of them should 
t1) OJNoC 16,20. 1. 1989, p. 12. compensate an accident victim, Member States must 
oblige one or the other to compensate the victim 
without delay. 
1.3. The Committee understands that the Com­
mission's proposal is based on the principle of the 
green card system, i.e. the obligatory provision of the 
minimum cover required by law in the country visited 
(see Annex). It notes that the Commission has not opted 
for the possibility of requiring that motor insurance 
policies issued in Member States imposing high levels 
of statutory cover should apply those same levels 
throughout the Community irrespective of the (lower) 
level required in the country visited. The Committee 
can accept the Commission's approach provided that 
it strictly monitors progress towards the minimum 
statutory levels of cover laid down by Article 1.2 of the 
second insurance Directive (84/5/EEC) (i.e. minimum 
cover of 350 000 ECU per victim or a minimum package 
of 500 000 ECU for all personal injuries irrespective of 
number of victims; 600 000 ECU for all personal injuries 
and material damages inclusive, arising from any one 
accident). 
1.4. The ending of 'one state coverage' appears to 
be the most controversial proposal. The Committee 
approves the Commission's approach. Insurance com­
panies will no doubt adjust the premiums for vehicles 
which have no prospect of leaving their home state. 
1.5. It is understood that the second Directive is not 
yet being implemented in full in all Member States. The 
Commission should take whatever steps are necessary 
to ensure that both the spirit and the letter of the law 
are observed. 
1.6. It is understood that the Commission is discuss­
ing with those countries who have already signified 
their agreement to comply with the provisions of the 
1st and 2nd Directives on a reciprocal basis, extension 
to accommodate the terms of this Directive. The Com­
mittee would encourage the Commission to pursue 
these discussions vigorously to secure early implemen-
No C 159/8 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
tation particularly by countries of the European Free 
Trade Association (EFTA). 
1.7. The Commission should take whatever steps are 
possible to ensure that guarantee funds settle claims for 
which they are responsible promptly once liability has 
been established, and the amount of compensation 
determined. 
1.8. The Commission should ensure that when draw­
ing up contracts assurers consider only risk aspects, not 
the nationality of the customer. 
2. Specific Comments 
2.1. Article 1 
This Article is generally acceptable. The Commission 
should ensure that insurance cover is provided also for 
persons who are forced to travel in a vehicle against 
their will. 
2.2. Article 2 
The use of the word 'the same single premium' along 
with the words 'at least the cover required by law in 
each Member State' makes the meaning of this Article 
unclear. It should be reworded, in accordance with 
paragraph 1.3 above, to make it clear that the cover 
referred to is the minimum statutory cover required 
Done at Brussels, 26 April 1989. by law in each of the other Member States on the 
understanding that nothing prevents the assurer from 
giving an additional cover. 
2.3. Article 3 
The emphasis on inability or unwillingness to pay 
clouds the issue. It should be made clear that this Article 
only comes into play once liability and the amount of 
compensation payable have been established either in 
a court of law or by agreement between the parties 
concerned. 
2.4. Article 4 
This Article should be reworded so that it requires 
Member States to establish machinery, insofar as this 
does not already exist, whereby one party is designated 
as responsible for compensating the victim in the first 
instance. The Commission should impress on the Mem­
ber States the need for swift, appropriate compensation 
for victims. 
2.5. Article 5 
This Article should be reworded to make it clear that 
the Directive comes into force one year after its adop­
tion by the Council of Ministers. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/9 
APPENDIX 
Compulsory motor insurance in the Member States at 1 January 1989 
Member State 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom Personal injuries per event 
Currency 
Unlimited 
60 million Dkr 
1,5 million DM 
10 million DR 
Unlimited 
500 million LIT 
Unlimited 
2 million FL 
(including 
property 
damage) 
20 million Esc 
(including 
property 
damage) 
Unlimited ECU 
7 514 136 
721 848 
62 965 
333 544 
855 334 
122 236 Personal injuries per person 
Currency 
Unlimited 
50 million Dkr 
1 million DM 
8 million Ptas 
5 million FF 
Unlimited 
300 million LIT 
Unlimited 
12 million Esc 
(including 
property 
damage) 
Unlimited ECU 
6 261 780 
481 232 
58 024 
722 871 
200 127 
73 342 Property damage 
Currency ECU 
Unlimited 
(except for fire 
and explosion) 
5 million FB 
10 million Dkr 
400 000 DM 
2 million DR 
2,2 million Ptas 
3 million FF 
40 000 £IRL 
50 million LIT 115 940 
1 252 356 
192 493 
12 593 
15 957 
433 723 
51672 
35 355 
Unlimited 
(except for fire 
and explosion 
50 million FL 
250 000 £ST ) 
1 159 396 
360 288 
Notes: — ECU conversion rates ruling on 30 September 1987 (amounts rounded up or down to nearest ECU). 
— France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Portugal apply higher amounts for certain vehicle categories. Greece and Italy 
apply lower amounts for all or certain motorcycles. 
Source: Commission of the European Communities.