WRITTEN QUESTION E-1369/03 by Antonio Di Pietro (ELDR) to the Commission. Protection of the rights of property buyers.
Date: 2003-04-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Convention on Human Rights, Italy, acquisition of property, bankruptcy, building industry, competence of the Member States, consumer protection, national law, property development, real property

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/191

The Commission is aware that these events do not automatically entail a change with regard to the legal
status of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam, which remains banned in the country. The Commission
will continue to monitor closely the situation of Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, but considers that these
recent gestures by the Government of Vietnam are an encouraging step towards enhanced tolerance of
freedom of religion.

Moreover, the Commission would refer to its reply to the Honourable Member’s previous written question
concerning the Venerable Thich Huyen Quang E-0621/03 (1).

(1) See page 115.

(2003/C 268 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1369/03

by Antonio Di Pietro (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 April 2003)

Subject: Protection of the rights of property buyers

The Italian bankruptcy law, which was drawn up in 1942, fails to protect the rights of consumers who
purchase apartments under construction in cases where the construction company goes bankrupt.

While in most European countries legislators have passed substantial measures safeguarding purchasers of
property under construction, not least in view of the fact that such purchasers are generally small savers
who invest all their assets in the purchase of a dwelling, the legislation in force in Italy is an outright
breach of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. More specifically,
Article 72 of the bankruptcy law allows the receiver to annul the preliminary contract for the sale of
property under construction and also in some cases the final deed, even if the buyer has already paid (in
whole or in substantial part) for the construction of the property, and even if this is already complete and
the buyer has entered into possession of and is occupying the premises.

Many property buyers are therefore forced to purchase for a second time a dwelling that they have already
almost paid for in full so as to prevent its sale by auction, or to look for an alternative dwelling and forfeit
not only the one they have already purchased but also all the funds they have invested in it. Unfortunately,
in spite of the huge losses which thousands of Italian families (200 000 according to ISTAT data) have
suffered as a result of this legislation, the continual failure of the Italian authorities to address this problem
has been conducive to judicial sales by auction, at the rate of 82 a day, which wipe out the savings of
Italian families who thought they had already purchased their property.

Will the Commission call on the Italian Government to pass urgent legislation in line with that in the
other Member States which is more attentive to the needs of its own consumers, thereby curtailing the
entrepreneurial risk carried by unsuspecting Italian families?

Does it not consider that, in a single market, all European citizens should benefit from equal protection in
the form of harmonised rules that govern the housing market with greater effectiveness and transparency
and fully protect the rights of European consumers?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2003)

The Commission recognises that the situation described by the Honourable Member may give rise to
problems for purchasers in Italy. However, the acquisition and financing of immovable property is still a
matter for national law and largely unaffected by Community legislation. In view of the nature of such
property the functioning of the internal market is less affected by national legislation in this area than in

C 268 E/192

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

the case of movable property. There is at present no evidence that the problems for buyers caused by the
bankruptcy of construction companies have a material impact on the internal market. Protecting private
purchasers in case of the bankruptcy of a construction company, as the Honourable Member suggests, is
therefore not covered by European law.

As a consequence, exceptions in the area of immovable property have expressly been provided for EC
legislation related to consumer protection. Article 3(2)(a) of the Doorstep Selling Directive 85/577/EEC,
Article 2(1)(a) of the Consumer Credit Directive 87/102/EEC as amended, recital 4 of the Timeshare
Directive 94/47/EC, and Article 3(1)(4th indent) of the Distance Selling Directive 97/7/EC state essentially
that contracts related to property rights in land or existing or projected building are not covered by their
respective field of application.

Moreover, the European Commission is precluded from obliging any particular Member State to modify its
national law. Should it however be established that the acquisition and financing of immovable property
poses problems for the internal market, harmonisation measures for the whole of the Community could be
envisaged as far as the Treaty permits the Community to act. But it is, under the present circumstances, the
task of national governments to ensure an adequate level of protection in their respective housing markets.

(2003/C 268 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1370/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Commissioners’ links to the Bilderberg Group

(4 April 2003)

Commissioners Mario Monti, Erikki Liikanen, Pedro Solbes Mira, Gunther Verheugen, Antonio Vitorino
and Frederik Bolkestein have in the past attended Bilderberg meetings and are thus de facto members, since
they are kept apprised of its activities. Commission President Romano Prodi was a Steering Committee
Member of Bilderberg in the 80s, at the time when ECB President Wim Duisenberg was Treasurer. Three
Commissioners are or have been members of the Trilateral Commission, Mario Monti, Chris Patten and
Pedro Solbes Mira.

Will the Commission say which Commissioners will be attending the forthcoming Bilderberg and Trilateral
meetings, whether they will be attending on behalf of the Commission or in an apparent private capacity,
and whether they will be granted daily allowances or other expenses in connection with those meetings?
Will the Commission ensure that these memberships are mentioned in the Commissioners’ individual
declarations of interest?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

Several Members of the Commission have been invited to and have participated in meetings of the
Bilderberg group during their term of office, while others have been invited and have participated before
becoming Members of the Commission and have not then participated during their term of office. It
should be pointed out that in the group’s rules there is no such category as ‘member of the group’. The
only category that exists is ‘member of the Steering Committee’.

No Member of the Commission is a member of the Steering Committee. Personalities who do not belong
to the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg group may be invited to the meetings.

Occasional participation at a meeting does not need to be mentioned in the declaration of interests
provided for by the Code of Conduct for Commissioners, since the act of participating occasionally at one
or another conference, or of receiving information on the activities of a group, does not necessarily mean
that the person concerned is a member of or belongs to a group.