WRITTEN QUESTION E-1455/97 by Per Stenmarck (PPE) to the Commission (28 April 1997)

Subject: Cars and free competition

Proposals for introducing 25-year design rights in respect of spare parts for cars are currently being discussed. They could have serious consequences for competition and result in increased costs for individual car owners. Findings of studies in this area show that, as has happened in other areas, an absence of competition will result directly in increased prices.

Will the Commission take steps to ensure free competition as regards spare parts for cars?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1997)

The Council and Parliament directive on the legal protection of designs ((COM(96) 66. )) which the Commission is proposing and to which the Honourable Member refers should strike the right balance between a high degree of protection for industrial and commercial property rights and adherence to the principle of free competition in the internal market. This position is also in line with Commission policy on employment, small and medium-sized enterprises and consumer protection. The Commission included in its proposal a repair clause (Article 14) permitting visible components of complex products such as cars to be reproduced by independent firms provided that they offer fair and reasonable remuneration to the rightholder.

On 10 June 1997 the Council unanimously adopted a common position. The repair clause was deleted, but a blocking clause now gives Member States the option of maintaining in force or introducing provisions preventing the use of spare parts produced by independent firms for the purpose of repairing a complex product so as to restore its original appearance.

The Commission considers that its proposal, as amended in the light of the changes proposed by Parliament (first reading), was such as to strike a balance between the interests of car producers, on the one hand, and spare-part manufacturers, insurers and consumers, on the other. While the Commission is pleased to see progress on the draft as a whole, it regrets the Council's position on this particular aspect of the repair clause. The proposal has now been sent to Parliament for its second reading.

In accordance with the Council's common position, each Member State would be responsible for stipulating in national legislation the requirements that it deemed appropriate for its territory. However, the common position contains a number of important points which may help to alleviate the problem. Firstly, the level of protection chosen ('novelty' and 'individual character') is relatively high and should, therefore, limit the number of spare parts qualifying for this protection. Secondly, the Council inserted the new Article 3(3) of the draft Directive (the 'under-the-bonnet' clause), which - as proposed by Parliament - excludes from protection spare parts that do not remain visible during normal use of the complex product (the definition of normal use has been amended so as to widen its scope). Lastly, the Council introduced Article 18a which stipulates that the Directive (the question of the repair clause is also expressly referred to) will be re-examined by the Commission five years after the deadline for incorporating it into national law. In the course of that re-examination, the Commission will be able - if necessary - to propose to Parliament and the Council amendments that experience has shown to be necessary for the completion of the internal market.