WRITTEN QUESTION P-0592/02 by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Compulsory civil liability insurance in respect of motor vehicles- obligation for insurance undertakings to accept applicants for insurance cover.
Date: 2002-02-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer protection, discriminatory price, insurance company, insurance law, insurance premium, motor vehicle insurance, third-party insurance

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/47

(2002/C 301 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0510/02

by Professor Sir Neil MacCormick (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 February 2002)

Subject: Religious liberty

Is the Commission aware of the French law of 30 May 2001 regarding restriction on religious liberty
aimed at protecting society from threats passed by dangerous sects? Given the importance of religious
liberty among European fundamental rights,
is the Commission satisfied that the law of 30 May is
sufficiently narrow in specification to avoid an infringement of rights that would be relevant to Article 6 of
the Treaty of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2002)

The attention of the Commission has been drawn several times to the French Law No 2001-504 aimed at
reinforcing the prevention and the repression of the sectarian movements affecting the human rights and
the fundamental freedoms to which the Honourable Member refers.

The above mentioned French legislation does not fall within the scope of Community legislation. The
Commission is therefore not in a position to intervene.

Although the Commission does have a right to take initiatives under the terms of Article 7 of the Treaty
on the European Union, this is limited to cases of serious and persistent violation by a Member State of the
principles stated in Article 6, paragraph 1, which is manifestly not the case.

The Commission would add that if a person considers that his or her fundamental rights have been
violated, there is always the possibility of a recourse before the European Court of Human Rights, after all
internal means have been exhausted.

(2002/C 301 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0592/02

by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 February 2002)

Subject: Compulsory civil

liability insurance in respect of motor vehicles- obligation for insurance

undertakings to accept applicants for insurance cover

Pursuant to Article 3 of Directive 72/166/EEC (1) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to insurance against civil liability, each Member State has drawn up the necessary rules so that civil
liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles normally based on its territory is covered by insurance.

In practice, however,
it appears that certain insurance undertakings are often only willing to insure
applicants who represent a low or very low insurance risk, the insurers basing their decisions chiefly on
the statistical probability of a particular applicant giving rise to an insurance claim. Insurance undertakings
are thus targeting niches in the insurance market where the risk of having to pay out on insurance claims
is lowest and hence the opportunity for making a profit is greatest.

This sort of business strategy means that it is increasingly difficult for drivers who, from a purely statistical
point of view, represent a greater insurance risk, e.g. young people and the elderly, to find an insurer who
is willing to insure them, even though their actions have not yet given rise to an insurance claim. This has
led in practice to an increase in the number of uninsured drivers, with all that this entails, such as an
increase in number of cases of hit-and-run in the event of accidents and the exclusion of some people
from using certain means of transport owing to one-sided arbitrary decisions by insurance undertakings.

C 301 E/48

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

Does the Commission not consider that such a policy on accepting applicants for insurance cover
undermines the principle underlying the obligation to take out insurance, namely to provide for risk cover
and risk-sharing? Is it planning, or is it willing, to present proposals for legislation to prevent such business
practices? Does it not take the view that, in order to ensure fair competition on the internal market,
insurance undertakings should be subject to a general obligation to accept any applicant who has not been
banned from driving by a court, subject to certain conditions?.

(1) OJ L 103, 2.5.1972, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2002)

It is true that certain groups of people involving higher risks may only obtain motor insurance coverage at
high cost. As the Honourable Member says, this can lead to uninsured drivers. However, where necessary,
mechanisms have been created in some Member States in order to ensure that a cover for compulsory
insurance is always available for all groups of drivers regardless of the risk. During the revision of the
motor insurance directives currently being undertaken by the Commission, no expert from the Member
States’ administrations has suggested the necessity to establish a harmonised Community mechanism in
this regard.

Furthermore, it should be noted that the contractual relationships between insurance undertakings (as well
as any other financial institution) and their customers are based on the principle of freedom concerning
contracts and prices, in such a way that none of the parties may be obliged to enter into an insurance
operation. The third non-life insurance Directive (92/49/EEC) (1) introduced the freedom to set scales of
premiums and abolished prior or systematic approval of scales and policies, including in motor insurance,
the aim being to complete the Internal Market in insurance.

The Commission believes that a transparent and integrated Internal Insurance Market in which insurers
really compete in the provision of motor insurance coverage will permit the citizens to find more easily
insurance for their vehicles at a lower cost.

(1) Directive 92/49/EEC, OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.

(2002/C 301 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0594/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 2002)

Subject: Carriers’ liability

immigration (P-2079/01 (1)) dated 17 September 2001,
In reply to a Written Question on illegal
Commissioner Vitorino said that
in June 2001, a Directive defining the
facilitation of unauthorised entry, movement and stay and an accompanying Framework Decision on the
strengthening of the penal framework to prevent the facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence,
which established a procedure for the prosecution of facilitators.

the Council had adopted,

Can the Commission confirm that these two documents have been formally approved?

(1) OJ C 40 E, 14.2.2002, p. 181.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2002)

The Honourable Member has asked the Commission about the state of play of the proposed Council
Directive defining the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence and the Council Framework
Decision on the strengthening of the penal framework to prevent the facilitation of unauthorised entry,
transit and residence.