Common Position (EC) No 11/2008 of 28 February 2008 adopted by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, with a view to the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters
Date: 2008-02-28
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: access to the courts, civil procedure, civil proceedings, commercial law, cross-border cooperation, dissemination of information, judicial cooperation, mediator, trade dispute

20.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122E/1

III

(Preparatory Acts)

COUNCIL

COMMON POSITION (EC) No 11/2008

adopted by the Council on 28 February 2008

with a view to adopting Directive 2008/…/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of …
on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matter

(2008/C 122 E/01)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE
EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Com-
munity, and in particular Article 61(c) and the second indent of
Article 67(5) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and
Social Committee (1),

Acting in accordance with the procedure
Article 251 of the Treaty (2),

laid down in

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

in which the free movement of persons

The Community has set
the objective of main-
itself
taining and developing an area of freedom, security and
justice,
is
ensured. To that end,
the Community has to adopt,
inter alia, measures in the field of judicial cooperation in
civil matters that are necessary for the proper functioning
of the internal market.

The principle of access to justice is fundamental and,
with a view to facilitating better access to justice, the
its meeting in Tampere on
European Council
15 and 16 October 1999 called for alternative, extra-judi-
cial procedures to be created by the Member States.

at

In May 2000 the Council adopted Conclusions on alter-
native methods of
settling disputes under civil and
commercial law, stating that the establishment of basic

(1) OJ C 286, 17.11.2005, p. 1.
(2) Opinion of the European Parliament of 29 March 2007 (OJ C 27 E,
31.1.2008, p. 129), Council Common Position of 28 February 2008
and Position of the European Parliament of … (not yet published in the
Official Journal).

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

in this area is an essential

principles
step towards
enabling the appropriate development and operation of
extrajudicial procedures for the settlement of disputes in
civil and commercial matters so as to simplify and
improve access to justice.

In April 2002 the Commission presented a Green Paper
on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial
law, taking stock of the existing situation as concerns
alternative dispute resolution methods in the European
Union and initiating wide-spread consultations with
Member States
and interested parties on possible
measures to promote the use of mediation.

The objective of securing better access to justice, as part
of the policy of the European Union to establish an area
of freedom, security and justice, should encompass access
to judicial as well as extrajudicial dispute resolution
methods. This Directive should contribute to the proper
functioning of
in particular as
the internal market,
concerns the availability of mediation services.

Mediation can provide a cost-effective and quick extraju-
dicial resolution of disputes in civil and commercial
matters through processes tailored to the needs of the
parties. Agreements resulting from mediation are more
likely to be complied with voluntarily and are more likely
to preserve an amicable and sustainable relationship
between the parties. These benefits become even more
pronounced
cross-border
elements.

displaying

situations

in

In order to promote further the use of mediation and
ensure that parties having recourse to mediation can rely
on a predictable legal framework, it is necessary to intro-
duce framework legislation addressing, in particular, key
aspects of civil procedure.

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

C 122E/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2008

The provisions of this Directive should apply only to
mediation in cross-border disputes, but nothing should
prevent Member States from applying such provisions
also to internal mediation processes.

anything in this Directive prejudice existing self-regu-
lating mediation systems in so far as these deal with
aspects which are not covered by this Directive.

This Directive should not in any way prevent the use of
modern communication technologies in the mediation
process.

This Directive should apply to processes whereby two or
more parties to a cross-border dispute attempt by them-
selves, on a voluntary basis, to reach an amicable agree-
ment on the settlement of their dispute with the assis-
tance of a mediator. It should apply in civil and commer-
cial matters. However, it should not apply to rights and
obligations on which the parties are not free to decide
themselves under the relevant applicable law. Such rights
and obligations are particularly frequent in family law
and employment law.

(15)

(16)

In order to provide legal certainty, this Directive should
indicate which date should be relevant for determining
whether or not a dispute which the parties attempt to
settle through mediation is a cross-border dispute. In the
absence of a written agreement, the parties should be
deemed to agree to use mediation at the point in time
when they take specific action to start the mediation
process.

To ensure the necessary mutual trust with respect to
confidentiality, effect on limitation and prescription
periods, and recognition and enforcement of agreements
resulting from mediation, Member States should encou-
the
rage, by any means
training of mediators and the introduction of effective
quality control mechanisms concerning the provision of
mediation services.

they consider appropriate,

This Directive should not apply to pre-contractual nego-
tiations or to processes of an adjudicatory nature such as
certain judicial conciliation schemes, consumer complaint
schemes, arbitration and expert determination or
to
processes administered by persons or bodies issuing a
formal recommendation, whether or not it be legally
binding as to the resolution of the dispute.

This Directive should apply to cases where a court refers
parties to mediation or in which national law prescribes
mediation. Furthermore, in so far as a judge may act as a
mediator under national law, this Directive should also
apply to mediation conducted by a judge who is not
responsible for any judicial proceedings relating to the
matter or matters in dispute. This Directive should not,
however, extend to attempts made by the court or judge
seised to settle a dispute in the context of
judicial
proceedings concerning the dispute in question or to
cases in which the court or judge seised requests assis-
tance or advice from a competent person.

(13)

The mediation provided for in this Directive should be a
voluntary process in the sense that the parties are them-
selves in charge of the process and may organise it as
it
they wish and terminate it at any time. However,
should be possible under national law for the courts to
set time-limits for a mediation process. Moreover, the
courts should be able to draw the parties' attention to the
possibility of mediation whenever this is appropriate.

(14) Nothing in this Directive should prejudice national legis-
lation making the use of mediation compulsory or
subject
to incentives or sanctions provided that such
legislation does not prevent parties from exercising their
should
right of access

to the judicial

system. Nor

(17) Member States should define such mechanisms, which
may include having recourse to market-based solutions,
and should not be required to provide any funding in
that respect. The mechanisms should aim at preserving
the flexibility of the mediation process and the autonomy
of
the parties, and at ensuring that mediation is
conducted in an effective, impartial and competent way.
Mediators should be made aware of the existence of the
European Code of Conduct for Mediators which should
also be made available to the general public on the
Internet.

(18)

In the field of consumer protection, the Commission has
adopted a Recommendation (1) establishing minimum
quality criteria which out-of-court bodies involved in the
consensual resolution of consumer disputes should offer
to their users. Any mediators or organisations coming
within the scope of
that Recommendation should be
encouraged to respect its principles. In order to facilitate
the dissemination of information concerning such bodies,
the Commission should set up a database of out-of-court
schemes which Member States consider as respecting the
principles of that Recommendation.

(19) Mediation should not be regarded as a poorer alternative
to judicial proceedings in the sense that compliance with
agreements resulting from mediation would depend on
the good will of the parties. Member States should there-
fore ensure that
the parties to a written agreement
resulting from mediation can have the content of their
agreement made enforceable. It should only be possible

(1) Commission Recommendation 2001/310/EC of 4 April 2001 on the
principles for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution
of consumer disputes (OJ L 109, 19.4.2001, p. 56).

20.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122E/3

(20)

(21)

for a Member State to refuse to make an agreement
enforceable if the content is contrary to its law, including
its private international law, or if its law does not provide
for the enforceability of the content of the specific agree-
ment. This could be the case if the obligation specified in
the agreement was by its nature unenforceable.

The content of an agreement resulting from mediation
which has been made enforceable in a Member State
should be recognised and declared enforceable in the
other Member States in accordance with applicable Com-
munity or national law. This could, for example, be on
the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001
of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recogni-
tion and enforcement of
and
commercial matters (1) or Council Regulation (EC)
No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning juris-
diction and the recognition and enforcement of judg-
ments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental
responsibility (2).

judgments

in civil

Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 specifically provides that,
in order to be enforceable in another Member State,
agreements between the parties have to be enforceable in
the Member State in which they were concluded. Conse-
quently,
if the content of an agreement resulting from
mediation in a family law matter is not enforceable in the
Member State where the agreement was concluded and
where the request for enforceability is made, this Direc-
tive should not encourage the parties to circumvent the
law of
that Member State by having their agreement
made enforceable in another Member State.

(22)

This Directive should not affect the rules in the Member
States concerning enforcement of agreements resulting
from mediation.

(23)

(24)

Confidentiality in the mediation process is important and
this Directive should therefore provide for a minimum
degree of compatibility of civil procedural rules with
regard to how to protect the confidentiality of mediation
in any subsequent civil and commercial judicial proceed-
ings or arbitration.

In order to encourage the parties to use mediation,
Member States should ensure that their rules on limita-
tion and prescription periods do not prevent the parties
from going to court or to arbitration if their mediation
attempt fails. Member States should make sure that this
result is achieved even though this Directive does not
harmonise national rules on limitation and prescription
periods. Provisions on limitation and prescription periods

(1) OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 1791/2006 (OJ L 363, 20.12.2006, p. 1).

(2) OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC)

No 2116/2004 (OJ L 367, 14.12.2004, p. 1).

in international agreements as
implemented in the
Member States, for instance in the area of transport law,
should not be affected by this Directive.

(25) Member States should encourage the provision of infor-
mation to the general public on how to contact media-
tors and organisations providing mediation services. They
should also encourage legal practitioners to inform their
clients of the possibility of mediation.

(26)

(27)

(28)

(29)

(30)

In accordance with point 34 of
the Interinstitutional
agreement on better law-making (3), Member States are
encouraged to draw up, for themselves and in the inter-
ests of the Community, their own tables illustrating, as
far as possible, the correlation between this Directive and
the transposition measures, and to make them public.

This Directive seeks to promote the fundamental rights,
and takes into account the principles, recognised in par-
ticular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the
European Union.

Since the objective of this Directive cannot be sufficiently
achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by
reason of the scale or effects of the action, be better
achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt
measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity
as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with
the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article,
this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in
order to achieve that objective.

In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol on the posi-
tion of the United Kingdom and Ireland, annexed to the
Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing
the European Community,
the United Kingdom and
Ireland have given notice of their wish to take part in the
adoption and application of this Directive.

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on
the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on
European Union and to the Treaty establishing the
European Community, Denmark does not take part in
the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or
subject to its application,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

Objective and scope

1.
The objective of this Directive is to facilitate access to
alternative dispute resolution and to promote the amicable
settlement of disputes by encouraging the use of mediation and
by ensuring a balanced relationship between mediation and judi-
cial proceedings.

(3) OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1.

C 122E/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2008

2.
This Directive shall apply, in cross-border disputes, to civil
and commercial matters except as regards rights and obligations
which are not at the parties' disposal under the relevant applic-
able law. It shall not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs
or administrative matters or to the liability of the State for acts
and omissions in the exercise of State authority (‘acta iure
imperii’).

In this Directive,

3.
Member States with the exception of Denmark.

the term ‘Member State’ shall mean

Article 2

Cross-border disputes

1.
For the purposes of this Directive a cross-border dispute
shall be one in which at least one of the parties is domiciled or
habitually resident in a Member State other than that of any
other party on the date on which:

(a)

the parties agree to use mediation after the dispute has
arisen,

(b) mediation is ordered by a court,

(c) an obligation to use mediation arises under national law, or

(d) for the purposes of Article 5 an invitation is made to the

parties.

2.
Notwithstanding paragraph 1, for the purposes of Arti-
cles 7 and 8 a cross-border dispute shall also be one in which
judicial proceedings or arbitration following mediation between
the parties are initiated in a Member State other than that in
which the parties were domiciled or habitually resident on the
date referred to in paragraph 1(a), (b) or (c).

3.
For the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2, domicile shall be
determined in accordance with Articles 59 and 60 of Regulation
(EC) No 44/2001.

Article 3

Definitions

or the judge seised to settle a dispute in the course of judi-
cial proceedings concerning the dispute in question.

(b) ‘Mediator’ means any third person who is asked to conduct
a mediation in an effective, impartial and competent way,
regardless of the denomination or profession of that third
person in the Member State concerned and of the way in
which the third person has been appointed or requested to
conduct the mediation.

Article 4

Ensuring the quality of mediation

1. Member States shall encourage, by any means which they
consider appropriate, the development of, and adherence to,
voluntary codes of conduct by mediators and organisations
providing mediation services, as well as other effective quality
control mechanisms concerning the provision of mediation
services.

2. Member States shall encourage the initial and further
training of mediators in order to ensure that the mediation is
conducted in an effective, impartial and competent way in rela-
tion to the parties.

Article 5

Recourse to mediation

1.
A court before which an action is brought may, when
appropriate and having regard to all the circumstances of the
case, invite the parties to use mediation in order to settle the
dispute. The court may also invite the parties to attend an infor-
mation session on the use of mediation if such sessions are held
and are easily available.

This Directive is without prejudice to national legislation
2.
making the use of mediation compulsory or subject to incen-
tives or sanctions, whether before or after judicial proceedings
have started, provided that such legislation does not prevent the
parties from exercising their right of access to the judicial
system.

For the purposes of this Directive the following definitions shall
apply:

Article 6

(a)

‘Mediation’ means a structured process, however named or
referred to, whereby two or more parties to a dispute
attempt by themselves, on a voluntary basis, to reach an
agreement on the settlement of their dispute with the assis-
tance of a mediator. This process may be initiated by the
parties or suggested or ordered by a court or prescribed by
the law of a Member State.

It includes mediation conducted by a judge who is not
responsible for any judicial proceedings concerning the
dispute in question. It excludes attempts made by the court

Enforceability of agreements resulting from mediation

it

that

to request

1. Member States shall ensure that
is possible for the
parties, or for one of them with the explicit consent of the
others,
the content of a written agreement
resulting from mediation be made enforceable. The content of
such an agreement shall be made enforceable unless, in the case
in question, either the content of that agreement is contrary to
the law of the Member State where the request is made or the
law of that Member State does not provide for its enforceability.

20.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122E/5

2.
The content of the agreement may be made enforceable
by a court or other competent authority in a judgment or deci-
sion or in an authentic instrument in accordance with the law
of the Member State where the request is made.

2.
Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to provisions on
limitation or prescription periods in international agreements to
which Member States are party.

3. Member States shall inform the Commission of the courts
or other authorities competent to receive requests in accordance
with paragraphs 1 and 2.

Article 9

Information for the general public

Nothing in this Article shall affect the rules applicable to
4.
the recognition and enforcement in another Member State of an
agreement made enforceable in accordance with paragraph 1.

Member States shall encourage, by any means which they
in
consider appropriate, the availability to the general public,
particular on the Internet, of information on how to contact
mediators and organisations providing mediation services.

Article 7

Confidentiality of mediation

1.
Given that mediation is intended to take place in a
manner which respects confidentiality, Member States shall
ensure that, unless the parties agree otherwise, neither mediators
nor those involved in the administration of
the mediation
shall be compelled to give evidence in civil and
process
commercial judicial proceedings or arbitration regarding infor-
mation arising out of or
in connection with a mediation
process, except:

(a) where this is necessary for overriding considerations of
public policy of the Member State concerned, in particular
when required to ensure the protection of the best interests
of children or to prevent harm to the physical or psycholo-
gical integrity of a person; or

(b) where disclosure of the content of the agreement resulting
from mediation is necessary in order to implement or
enforce that agreement.

2.
Nothing in paragraph 1 shall preclude Member States
from enacting stricter measures to protect the confidentiality of
mediation.

Article 8

Effect of mediation on limitation and prescription periods

1. Member States shall ensure that parties who choose
mediation in an attempt to settle a dispute are not subsequently
prevented from initiating judicial proceedings or arbitration in
relation to that dispute by the expiry of limitation or prescrip-
tion periods during the mediation process.

Article 10

Information on competent courts and authorities

The Commission shall make publicly available, by any appro-
priate means, information on the competent courts or authori-
to
ties
Article 6(3).

the Member States pursuant

communicated by

Article 11

Review

later than … (*),

the Commission shall submit

Not
to the
European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic
and Social Committee a report on the application of this Direc-
tive. The report shall consider the development of mediation
throughout the European Union and the impact of this Directive
in the Member States. If necessary, the report shall be accompa-
nied by proposals to adapt this Directive.

Article 12

Transposition

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations,
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this
Directive before … (**), with the exception of Article 10, for
which the date of compliance shall be … (***) at the latest. They
shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

When they are adopted by Member States, these measures shall
contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by
such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The
methods of making such reference shall be laid down by
Member States.

(*) 8 years after the date of adoption of this Directive.
(**) 3 years after the date of adoption of this Directive.
(***) 30 months after the date of adoption of this Directive.

C 122E/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2008

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the
text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in
the field covered by this Directive.

Article 14

Addressees

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Article 13

Entry into force

Done at …

into force on the twentieth day
This Directive shall enter
following its publication in the Official Journal of the European
Union.

For the European Parliament

The President

…

For the Council

The President

…

20.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122E/7

STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL'S REASONS

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The Commission submitted its proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters on 22 October 2004.

2. At its meeting on 1 and 2 December 2005 the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) took note of a

common understanding reached within the Committee on Civil Law Matters (ADR) (1).

3. The European Parliament adopted its first reading opinion on the proposal on 29 March 2007 (2).

4. The Committee on Civil Law Matters (ADR) examined the amendments of the European Parliament
on 13 April 2007. In the light of that examination a consolidated version of the proposal was
prepared which was subsequently discussed at a number of meetings and redrafted on a number of
points.

5. On 3 October 2007 Coreper endorsed a compromise text (3) resulting from the discussions in the
Committee as the starting point for negotiations with the European Parliament with a view to
reaching an agreement at second reading.

6. During subsequent contacts with the European Parliament some amendments to the compromise
text were agreed. At its meeting on 8 and 9 November 2007 the Council (Justice and Home Affairs)
reached political agreement on this new text (4). The European Parliament confirmed on this occa-
sion that it could accept the text.

7. The Council adopted its Common Position by unanimity on 28 February 2008.

II. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON POSITION

8. The Council Common Position corresponds to the text of the political agreement from November
2007 which reflected the outcome of the negotiations between the Council, the Commission and
the European Parliament following the adoption of the first reading opinion of the European
Parliament.

A. Amendments 1 to 11 concerning the recitals

9. The Council has taken over the substance of amendments 1-11 to the extent possible, but many
have been redrafted and inserted in a different order to reflect the final wording and structure of
the draft Directive.

10. The Council has not accepted amendment 2, but has maintained in Recital 18 a reference to the
Commission Recommendation mentioned in the amendment. Amendment 4 is reflected in
Recital 8, but in a more succinct form. The last sentence of amendment 6 has been left out, as the
Council has maintained the text of Article 7a of the common understanding from December 2005
(Article 8 of
the Common Position). Amendment 10 has been incorporated in substance in
Recital 17, but the specific references to Commission Recommendations have been left out and the
same applies to the reference to the publishing of the European Code of Conduct for Mediators.

11. The Council has inserted some new recitals in order to explain further certain aspects of the draft
Directive. The Council has wanted to acknowledge that modern communication technologies are
bound to be used increasingly in the mediation process and has therefore inserted Recital 9 dealing
with this aspect. The Council has also wished to make it clear that the draft Directive does not lay
down rules on enforcement and that the current rules in the Member States concerning enforce-
ment therefore remain unaffected by the Directive (Recital 22). Finally, in order to abide by the
Interinstitutional agreement on better lawmaking the Council has inserted Recital 26 encouraging
the Member States to draw up correlation tables when implementing the Directive.

(1) 15043/05 JUSTCIV 217 CODEC 1102.
(2) 8117/1/07 REV 1 CODEC 312 JUSTCIV 76.
(3) 13290/07 JUSTCIV 243 CODEC 1000.
(4) 14316/07 JUSTCIV 278 CODEC 1130.

C 122E/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2008

B. Amendments 12 to 34 concerning the Articles

12. The Council has accepted amendments 12, 13 and 14 concerning Article 1 which to a large extent
mirrored the text of the common understanding from December 2005. The suggested deletion of
part of the first sentence of paragraph 2 has however not been accepted, but the exception has been
worded in a different manner and the text of the Common Position now reads: ‘except as regards
rights and obligations which are not at the parties' disposal under the relevant applicable law’.
Furthermore, a clarification of the provision has been provided in Recital 10.

13. The Council has incorporated the substance of amendment 15 concerning a new Article on the
cross-border nature of the Directive, but has redrafted the provision to some extent. It has also
inserted a new recital (Recital 15) to clarify paragraph 1 further.

14. Amendments 16 and 17 are reflected in the text of the current Article 3. The Council has accepted
to mention specifically in the text that the mediation process is of a voluntary nature and has also
stressed this in Recital 13. Therefore the Council has considered it unnecessary to insert a new para-
graph on this aspect as suggested by the European Parliament in amendment 21. As for the text of
subparagraph (b) of the current Article 3 the Council has decided to maintain the text of its
common understanding from December 2005 considering this text to make it sufficiently clear
which requirements a mediator has to meet when conducting a mediation.

15. The Council has incorporated amendment 18 in Article 4 of the Common Position with the excep-

tion of the suggested paragraph 3 which the Council was unable to accept.

16. Amendments 19 and 20 concerning Article 3 (Article 5 of the Common Position) which corre-
sponded to the text of the common understanding from December 2005 have been accepted in
full. The same applies to amendments 22 and 27 which concerned deletion of provisions.

17. Amendments 23 to 26 concerning Article 5 (Article 6 of the Common Position) have been

accepted by the Council with a slight redrafting of paragraph 1 to make the text clearer.

18. As for amendment 28 the Council has accepted the substantive part which is reflected in the text of
Article 7 of the Common Position. The Council has however decided to maintain the provision as
drafted in the common understanding from December 2005. This means that the Council has not
accepted that it should also be impossible for parties to a mediation to disclose information
concerning the mediation process and that the ban on disclosure should cover also disclosure to
third parties. By maintaining the text of the common understanding the Council has also decided
not to put the Member States under the obligation to ensure that those involved in a mediation
process would not even have the right to give evidence.

19. The Council was unable to accept amendment 29 which in its view contained provisions which
were too detailed for a Directive. It has therefore in Article 8 of the Common Position maintained
the text of the common understanding from December 2005. However,
in order to stress the
importance of this provision and to meet the concerns of the European Parliament the Council has
inserted a new recital (Recital 24) which makes it make quite clear that Member States are put
under an obligation of result by the provision. Amendment 30 concerning paragraph 2 of the same
Article was accepted by the Council, but the last part of the provision was deemed unnecessary and
therefore left out in the final text.

20. The Council has accepted amendment 31 which is reflected in the new Article 9 of the Common

Position and in the corresponding recital (Recital 25).

21. Amendment 32 was rejected by the Council on the ground that it would be impossible to publish
the European Code of Conduct for Mediators in the Official Journal since the Code of Conduct is
not an officially adopted text. However, as mentioned in paragraph 10 the Council has inserted a
reference to the Code of Conduct in Recital 17.

20.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122E/9

22. Amendment 33 containing a review clause has been accepted in substance by the Council, and such
a provision now features in Article 11 of the Common Position, albeit in a different wording. The
Council was unable to accept the last part of the suggested review clause concerning a harmonisa-
limitation and prescription periods just as it was unable to accept amendment 29
tion of
concerning the Article on the same subject. This particular provision was part of the negotiations
with the European Parliament and the current text has therefore already been agreed.

23. The Council was unable to accept amendment 34 since the suggested implementation through
voluntary agreements would be impossible for legal reasons. However, to make it clear that existing
self-regulating mediation systems can be maintained insofar as they deal with aspects which are not
covered by the Directive a sentence to this effect was inserted in Recital 14. As for the dates for
compliance with the Directive suggested in amendment 34 the Council has set different ones.
Member States will now have 36 months from the date of adoption to comply with the Directive,
but must communicate information on the competent court or authorities to the Commission
within 30 months.

III. CONCLUSION

24. The Council considers its Common Position to be a well-balanced text which reflects faithfully the

agreement reached with the European Parliament in the negotiations in October 2007.