Resolution on the draft Commission interpretative communication on freedom to provide services and the general good in the insurance sector (SEC(97)1824 C4-0049/ 98)
Date: 1998-10-22
Institutions: Committee on Legal Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: collective interest, freedom to provide services, history, insurance













EUR-Lex - 51998IP0307 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51998IP0307

Resolution on the draft Commission interpretative communication on freedom to provide services and the general good in the insurance sector (SEC(97)1824 C4-0049/ 98)  


Official Journal C 341 , 09/11/1998 P. 0144 





A4-0307/98Resolution on the draft Commission interpretative communication on freedom to provide services and the general good in the insurance sector (SEC(97)1824 - C4-0049/98)The European Parliament,- having regard to the draft Commission interpretative communication of 10 October 1997 on freedom to provide services and the general good in the insurance sector (SEC(97)1824 - C4-0049/98),- having regard to the draft Commission interpretative communication on freedom to provide services and the interest of the general good in the second banking directive (SEC(97)1193 - C4-0465/97) and Parliament's opinion of 12 May 1998 thereon ((OJ C 167, 1.6.1998, p. 27. )), which essentially concern similar problems,- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights (A4-0307/98),1. Notes that, as the provision of insurance services by insurance undertakings authorised in one Member State directly for insured parties in another Member State under the freedom to provide services (without a subsidiary company or branch being established in the latter Member State) is still exceptional, there is not yet a single market in this sector, although this was to be made possible by the 'Third Insurance Directives';2. Notes that this is due to various factors, some entirely attributable to corporate policy, but that the requirements imposed by the host Member State's authorities with a reference to the 'general good', which are sometimes surprising and difficult to satisfy, certainly play an important part in this context;3. Welcomes the Commission's decision to address these difficulties and considers it helpful that, in contrast to the draft interpretative communication on the provision of services in the banking sector, the Commission has also given practical examples of provisions which Member States regard as justified by the general good, but which it deems inadmissible;4. Considers that, if the communication is to be balanced, examples that satisfy the criteria of the 'general good' should also be given;5. Points out that, as the Commission itself admits, this method of 'interpretation by the executive' is not normative and can replace neither clarifications equivalent to law - by means of directives or regulations - nor clarifications by the Court of Justice, the only body qualified to give binding interpretations of Community law;6. Shares the Commission's view, however, that the concept of 'general good' is best defined by means of 'subtraction', through the identification and description of areas that cannot be included in this concept;7. Encourages the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to issue warnings and initiate proceedings in accordance with Article 169 of the EC Treaty in cases where it detects unjustified reference to the general good;8. Takes the view that the harmonisation achieved in the sphere of general law of contract through Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts ((OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29.)) is not enough to prevent insurance undertakings wishing to provide services in a Member State other than that in which they are authorised from being unfairly required to comply with national legislation by a reference to the general good and that the efforts which began ten years ago to approximate the most important provisions of the law of insurance contracts and insurance conditions should therefore be resumed;9. Considers it justified for insurance undertakings intending to carry on business for the first time in another Member State under the freedom to provide services to be required to give their supervisory authority, i.e. the supervisory authority of the Member State in which they are authorised, prior notification so that this authority may fulfil the supervisory obligations it has beyond its national frontiers, a requirement which, however, exists in principle only once, is of a purely regulatory nature and must on no account amount to a 'quasi-authorisation procedure';10. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council and the supervisory authorities of the Member States.