WRITTEN QUESTION E-3066/02 by Terence Wynn (PSE) to the Commission. Motor racing events and EU law.
Date: 2002-10-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: application of EU law, case-law (EU), competition law, discrimination on the basis of nationality, interpretation of the law, sporting event, sports body

C 192 E/94

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

subsequently extended to the Swedish krona. As of that date, cross-border transfers in euros and in the
Swedish krona will be charged at the same rate as domestic transfers between the beneficiary and the
issuer.

The Commission has not carried out any studies on bank charges in the euro zone during the last twelve
months. It does not, therefore, have exhaustive and up-to-date statistics on cross-border payments in euros.
However, after the entry into force on 1 July 2002 of the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 2560/2001
relating to payment cards, it obtained information on the payment charges before and after 1 July 2002.
The data show that there was a substantial reduction in charges for cross-border transactions in the euro
zone as they were aligned with charges on strictly domestic transactions. The reorganisation of charges
resulted in increases for certain services, but only in a very small number of cases.

On the basis of the information available to it, the Commission takes the view (3) that the situation has
improved and that, barring a few exceptions, the provisions of the Regulation have been applied in an
entirely satisfactory manner.

As provided for in the Regulation, the Commission will submit in July 2004 a report on the application of
the Regulation and, in particular, its impact on payment charges within the Member States. To that end,
several statistical surveys will be launched.

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997.
(2) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001.
(3) As at September 2002.

(2003/C 192 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3066/02

by Terence Wynn (PSE) to the Commission

(25 October 2002)

Subject: Motor racing events and EU law

Is it possible for an organisation such as the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile to restrict the rights
of EU citizens to compete in motor racing events in countries other than their own? In the past, a full
racing licence issued in any EU country has allowed its holder to compete in any event organised in
another EU country. Would such restrictive action breach EU law?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 2002)

As the Court of Justice has consistently held (see, for example, the Bosman judgment of 15 December
1995, case C-415/93), sport is subject to Community law insofar as it constitutes an economic activity
within the meaning of Article 2 of the Treaty, which is the case with participation in motor racing events.

The Commission is unable to comment on whether restrictions on competing in this type of event are
admissible, on account of the lack of other details or sufficiently clear and precise information in the
question put by the Honourable Member.

On a general level, however, the Commission would point out that the provisions of Community law
concerning freedom of movement of persons and of provision of services do not preclude rules or
practices in the field of sport which are justified on non-economic grounds and relate to the particular
nature and context of certain competitions. In addition, associations or organisations not governed by
public law are also compelled to comply with the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality
and the prohibition of any unjustified and or disproportionate cross-border restrictions on sporting
activities, even when applied without distinction.

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/95

that a sporting
With regard to Community competition rules,
organisation could commit an offence under Article 82 of the EC Treaty if it was in a dominant position
and used its regulatory power to exclude from the market, for no objective reason, economic operators
who met objective criteria.

the Commission would point out

(2003/C 192 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3123/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 October 2002)

Subject: Mutual recognition of registry office records and residence documents between the Member States

in the interests of citizens moving within the Community

1.
Is the Commission familiar with the experience, described below, of a Netherlands man who began a
relationship in Ireland with an Irish lady born in England and who later returned to the Netherlands with
his wife and child? The circumstances were as follows:

(a)

It was particularly easy for the man to settle in Ireland, where, despite that fact that (cid:1) contrary to
information given to him beforehand (cid:1) no police station was prepared to register the newcomer, it
nevertheless proved possible without official registration or a residence permit to apply for a tax
number, work, obtain insurance and take driving lessons;

(b) There was no problem registering the mother and daughter in the Netherlands, but registration of
their relationship as mother and daughter was refused because the English birth certificate (cid:1) both the
original document and a recently stamped and signed declaration (cid:1) was not recognised in the
Netherlands on the grounds that the United Kingdom had not signed an agreement;

(c) A declaration of guardianship by an Irish court together with a declaration by the Irish child benefit

agency were also not accepted as evidence of the mother-daughter relationship;

(d) The persons concerned were told to request a new copy with an apostil, i.e. an expensive, stamped
declaration by a court authenticating the signature of a minister, official or notary, although the
authorities in the Netherlands could not say where this could be obtained in the United Kingdom;

(e)

It was recorded on the extract from the population register issued to the wife that she did not hold a
valid residence permit and that, in the absence of such a permit, she was not allowed to take a driving
test.

2. Which other Member States require a birth certificate as a precondition for registration as a resident?

Are there other cases of EU Member States not recognising each other’s registry office documents
3.
and making it more difficult for residents and partners of different nationalities to live together? Has the
Commission’s approach to date been one of accepting such situations or has it taken action that has led to
changes?

4.
Does the Commission expect the accession of new Member States to the EU to lead to greater
confusion in relation to such matters and to more individuals being disadvantaged as a result of countries’
failure to recognise each other’s documents? What steps have been taken in preparing for accession to
prevent such problems from increasing?

5. What coordination measures are being taken in order to permanently eliminate this problem,
ensuring that documents recognised in a Member State remain valid in another Member State without any
need for separate bilateral agreements, except where it is shown by means of an established procedure, a
procedure which is the same for all, that such a document has been obtained wrongfully or with criminal
intent?

Answer by M. Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

1.
Article 18 of the EC Treaty states that every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside
freely within the territory of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the
Treaty and by the measures adopted to give it effect.