WRITTEN QUESTION E-1155/02 by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European quick-claims procedure.
Date: 2002-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European judicial area, civil proceedings, commercial law, consumer protection, domestic market

C 301 E/94

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

In order to guarantee the availability of electrical vehicles on the market, the Commission will closely
monitor the substitution process of cadmium in batteries in electrical vehicles. This substitution process is
already taking place and is expected to be further encouraged after the entry into force of the revised
Annex II. At the end of 2004, the Commission will publish the findings of its analysis on this substitution
process.
the
Commission may propose to extend the exemption period for cadmium in batteries in electrical vehicles.

the availability of electrical vehicles could be jeopardised,

If those findings prove that

Lead in batteries is another application which has been reviewed by the Commission as a matter of
priority. Most automotive vehicles with a combustion engine, which account for a large percentage of all
vehicles registered in Europe, operate on the basis of lead-acid starter batteries.

The assessment carried out by the Commission showed that, contrary to cadmium in batteries for electrical
vehicles, there are no practicable alternatives for lead-acid batteries available on the market and that no
substitutes are expected to be available in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the Commission has proposed
to maintain the exemption for the application lead in batteries in Annex II, without an expiry date.

(1)

IP/02/366.

(2002/C 301 E/098)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1155/02

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 April 2002)

Subject: European quick-claims procedure

Consumer confidence is crucial if a modern and competitive internal market is to function properly. The
former is, however, severely undermined by non-payment in cross-border transactions with other Member
States, where debt recovery is slow, expensive and uncertain.

In the light of this, and the creation of the European Extra-judicial Network, Community internal market
specialists have proposed introducing ‘quick-claims’ courts at which the judicial authorities, having been
provided with the necessary supporting evidence by the vendor, can reach on-the-spot decisions.

Does the Commission believe that, in order to revitalise the single European market and overcome the lack
of confidence in the current slow judicial processes, it should initiate a European quick-claims procedure
which would allow vendors with genuine claims to recover their debts immediately?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2002)

The Honourable Member raises the question whether the Commission considers to take initiatives aimed at
overcoming the obstacles for vendors who want to enforce their clearly justified claims in cross-border
cases which are caused by slow, expensive and uncertain judicial procedures. More specifically, the
Honourable Member asks whether the Commission envisages the creation of a European ‘Injonction de
payer’ procedure.

The Union faces the challenge of ensuring that in a genuine European Area of Justice individuals and
businesses are not prevented or discouraged from exercising their rights by the incompatibility or
complexity of the legal and judicial systems in the Member States. The European Council meeting in
Tampere (15-16 October 1999) called for initiatives to establish special common procedural rules for
simplified and accelerated litigation in several areas, notably with regard to small consumer and
commercial claims and uncontested claims. Also the Council programme of measures for implementation
of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters recognises that in some
areas the abolition of exequatur might coincide with the establishment of a specific, uniform or
harmonised procedure laid down within the Community and envisages the areas of uncontested claims
(European ‘Injonction de payer’ procedure) and small claims as examples of such an approach.

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/95

is currently exploring the
The Commission is pleased to inform the Honourable Member that
possibilities of legislative initiatives in these two areas. The Commission is working on a Green Paper the
adoption of which is foreseen for 2002 which should launch a wide public consultation on the subject. In
order to prepare the Green Paper, the Commission has held an expert meeting with representatives from
the Member States on 28 May 2002.

it

(2002/C 301 E/099)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1162/02

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 April 2002)

Subject: Oversized pig farm

According to press reports and complaints from local people and environmental organisations, a huge pig
farm is being built at Megala Kalyvia in the municipality of Trikala, Thessaly, bringing with it
environmental and public health hazards. An area of 80 hectares is to accommodate 8 500 sows. In
practice, this means that a total of some 100 000 animals will be concentrated on that area.

With such a large farm the risk of the emergence of animal diseases increases several
fold, waste
management is a problem, and there is a risk of contaminating the ground water in Thessaly. Moreover, as
the trend throughout Europe is to move away from such vast breeding units, can the Commission answer
the following:

1. Will this investment be directly or indirectly linked to Community funding?

2. What is the Commission’s assessment of the specific features of this pig farm?

3.

In view of the local opposition to the project and the environmental impact assessment, will the
Commission ask the Greek authorities to explain how they will protect public health and the
environment from the effects of this farm?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2002)

1.
The Commission’s initial understanding is that no direct or indirect aid for the investment in
question has been granted from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF). This is
the only Community fund granting aid in connection with agricultural production, including the pig sector.

2. and 3.
If the project were to be submitted for part-financing the EAGGF regulatory provisions would
have to be applied by the national and/or regional authorities involved: the project would have to be
geared to the normal outlets, there could be no increase in capacity and the environmental constraints
would have to be respected. The Community legislation covering the environmental
impact of such
undertakings includes Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on assessment of the effects of
certain public and private projects on the environment (1) and Council Directive 91/676/EEC of
12 December 1991 concerning protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural
sources (2). Their provisions must be respected where authorisation to establish such pig farms and disposal
of their manure are concerned.

The Commission requests the Honourable Member to submit more detailed information on this project to
build a pig farm at Megala Kalyvia. It will examine this to ascertain whether Greece has broken its
obligations in the EAGGF framework or under European environmental law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985 (amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, OJ L 73, 14.3.1997).
(2) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991.