REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION Interim evaluation report on the results obtained from and the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of the Civil Justice financing programme
Date: 2011-06-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic support, exchange of information, financing plan, judicial cooperation, occupational status

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 15.6.2011 
COM(2011) 351 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

Interim evaluation report on the results obtained from and the qualitative and 
quantitative aspects of the implementation of the Civil Justice financing programme 

 
 
 
 
  
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 2 

BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................ 2 

OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAMME................................................................................... 3 

DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACTION UNDER THE PROGRAMME......................................... 4 

MANAGEMENT OF THE PROGRAMME ............................................................................. 5 

COMMISSION INITIATIVES................................................................................................ 11 

SPECIFIC PROJECTS............................................................................................................. 12 

SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN THE FIELD OF COMPETITION LAW ...................................... 20 

OPERATING GRANTS .......................................................................................................... 21 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................... 23 

EN 

1 

   EN 

 
INTRODUCTION 

The  Decision1  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25 September  2007  which 
establishes for the period 2007-2013 the Specific Programme ‘Civil Justice’ provides that the 
Commission MUST present to the European Parliament and the Council an interim evaluation 
report  on  the  results  obtained  and  the  qualitative  and  quantitative  aspects  of  the 
implementation of the Programme no later than 31 March 2011. 

This  report  complies  with  that  obligation:  it  describes  progress  on  the  programme  since  its 
adoption in September 2007 and summarises its main achievements.  

The initial measures financed under the programme did not start until just under three years 
ago. Only a few of these measures have been completed. Consequently, the report will focus 
on the programme's structure and management. 

The report also discusses some of the questions which will be the focus of the preparations for 
the next financial programming exercise.  

The proposed evaluation is based in particular on: 

•  the  statistical  and  budgetary  data  held  by  the  Commission  and  the  experience  it  has 

acquired since the previous financing programme; 

•  statistical  and  budgetary  data,  and  impressions  as  regards  the  effectiveness  of  the 

programme in supporting the Commission's political activities;  

•  an analysis of the working of the programme; 

•  an  exchange  of  ideas  during  an  informal  meeting  with  most  of  the  Member  States' 
representatives  on  the  programme  committee,  which  was  wholly  devoted  to  this 
evaluation. The meeting was held in Brussels on 11 January 2011. 

The Commission will also present, no later than 31 December 2014, a final evaluation report 
on the programme which will use performance indicators to determine whether its objectives 
have been achieved.  

BACKGROUND 

The  programme  follows  on  from  earlier  programmes:  Grotius  (1996–2000),  Grotius-civil 
(2001),  Schuman  (1999–2001)  and,  for  2002–2006,  the  general  Community  framework  of 
activities to facilitate the implementation of judicial cooperation in civil matters. 

The purpose of the Grotius programme was to facilitate judicial cooperation between Member 
States by fostering mutual knowledge of legal and judicial systems. It was intended for legal 
practitioners  and  provided  funding  for  training,  exchanges  and  work-experience  projects, 
organisation of meetings, studies and research, and the dissemination of information. 

1 

No 1149/2007/EC, OJ L 257, 3.10.2007, p. 16. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Robert  Schuman  project  was  implemented  between  1999  and  2001  with  a  view  to 
promoting and supporting measures aimed at improving awareness of Community law within 
the  legal  professions.  The  general  objective  was  to  gradually  improve  the  application  of 
Community law throughout the EU. 

The Commission then proposed the establishment of a new framework programme on judicial 
cooperation in civil matters for the period 2002-2006. The new programme was adopted by 
the Council in the spring of 2002. It focused in particular on projects leading to more concrete 
results and on the need for a closer link to the programme's objectives and the priorities set 
out in the conclusions of the Tampere European Council. The programme’s main new feature 
was the possibility of financing NGO activities and projects carried out at the initiative of the 
Commission.  

On 6 April 2005 the Commission published a Communication to the European Parliament and 
to  the  Council  with  a  view  to  establishing  a  General  Programme  ‘Fundamental  Rights  and 
Justice’ for the period 2007–2013. This consisted of four proposals for decisions, including a 
proposal  for  a  Council  decision  establishing  a  specific  Criminal  Justice  programme  and  a 
decision  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  establishing  a  Civil  Justice 
programme. 

These  two  programmes  will  establish  a  European  area  of  justice  based  on  the  principle  of 
mutual  recognition  of  court  rulings,  cooperation  between  judicial  authorities  in  civil  and 
criminal matters, and the fostering of trust. They are also intended to facilitate access to the 
courts and hence to facilitate the lives of European citizens, and to involve stakeholders and 
civil society in the debate on justice. 

The  Criminal  Justice  and  Civil  Justice  programmes  differ  in  that  they  have  different  legal 
bases  (Article  31  EU  for  criminal  justice  and  Article  61  EC  for  civil  justice),  but  their 
management methods are similar, which means that they are, generally speaking, consistent. 

The  Civil  Justice  programme  was  belatedly  adopted  under  the  co-decision  procedure  at  the 
end of September 2007, which led to delays in the publication of the calls for proposals and 
the selection of projects. The time has been made up.  

OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAMME 

The  main  objectives  of  the  programme  are  to  finance  measures  to  promote  judicial 
cooperation and so contribute to the establishment of a true European area of justice in civil 
matters. More specifically, the intention is to: 

•  promote judicial cooperation in order to contribute to the creation of a true European area 

of justice in civil matters; 

•  encourage  the  removal  of  barriers  to  the  smooth  functioning  of  cross-border  civil 

proceedings in Member States; 

•  improve the daily life of individuals and businesses by enabling them to assert their rights 

throughout the European Union, notably by fostering access to the courts; 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
•  improve  the  contacts,  exchange  of  information  and  networking  between  the  judicial  and 
administrative  authorities  and  the  legal  professions,  in  particular  by  promoting  judicial 
training  courses  aimed  at  improving  mutual  understanding  between  these  authorities  and 
professions. 

Each  year,  a  new  work  programme  and  new  calls  for  proposals  are  published.  The  work 
programme and calls for proposals set out in detail the priorities for the year in terms of calls 
for proposals and every stage of the selection procedure: 

•  no particular priority was defined in 2007, however; 

•  the overall priority for the grant programme in 2008 and 2009 was e-justice.  

•  the  overall  priority  in  2010  was  again  e-justice,  together  with  training  for  professionals 

working for the judicial system. 

•  a number of priorities have been adopted for 2011. 

The  definition  of  precise  priorities  will  certainly  make  the  programme  more  effective.  Yet 
they  are  regarded  only  as  an  indication:  the  annual  work  programmes  state  that  innovative 
projects falling outside the areas defined as priorities will not be penalised. In other words, the 
priorities are rather theoretical. 

The  annual  work  programmes  also  determine  the  rates  of  Community  cofinancing  and  the 
maximum and minimum thresholds governing this financing. 

For each year the cofinancing rate has been set at 80% of eligible costs, whereas it was only 
60%  under  the  previous  programme.  As  of  2009,  however,  the  thresholds  of  €50 000  and 
€200 000 were raised to €75 000 and €500 000.  

The programme is targeted at, inter alia, legal practitioners, national authorities and European 
Union citizens in general. 

Access to the programme is open to public or private organisations and institutions, including 
professional  organisations,  universities,  research  institutes  and  legal  and  judicial  training 
institutes  for  legal  practitioners,  international  organisations  and  Member  States'  non-
governmental organisations. 

The programme is open to all Member States except Denmark. The candidate and accession 
countries  and  the  Western  Balkan  countries  taking  part  in  the  stabilisation  and  association 
process can take part in the programme subject to certain conditions. 

DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACTION UNDER THE PROGRAMME 

The programme provides for various types of action, including: 

•  Projects at the initiative of the Commission 

These  include  specific  projects  initiated  by  the  Commission  such  as  studies  and  research, 
opinion polls and surveys, formulation of indicators and common methodologies, collection, 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
development and dissemination of data and statistics, seminars, conferences and meetings of 
experts,  organisation  of  public  campaigns  and  events,  development  and  maintenance  of 
websites, preparation and dissemination of information material, support for and management 
of networks of national experts, and analytical, monitoring and evaluation activities. 

The Commission uses procurement procedures for these activities.  

•  Specific projects 

These include specific transnational projects of Community interest presented by an authority 
or  any  other  body  of  a  Member  State,  an  international  organisation  or  a  non-governmental 
organisation,  and  involving  in  any  case  at  least  two  Member  States  or  at  least  one  Member 
State and one other State which can be either an accession country or a candidate country.  

The following countries may take part in these projects: the accession countries, the candidate 
countries  and  the  Western  Balkan  countries  included  in  the  stabilisation  and  association 
process  in  accordance  with  the  conditions  laid  down  in  the  association  agreements  or 
additional protocols thereto relating to participation in Community programmes concluded or 
to be concluded with those countries. At the time of writing, no non-Member country satisfied 
the conditions for taking part in the programme. 

NB:  Every  year  €800 000  is  set  as ide  to  finance  specific  projects  for  the  training  of  legal 
practitioners in the field of European competition law. This is the subject of separate calls for 
proposals. 

•  Operating grants 

The programme may finance the activities of non-governmental organisations or other entities 
pursuing an aim of general European interest in accordance with the general objectives of the 
programme under the conditions set out in the annual work programmes. 

It will be seen later that the rather cryptic wording of this provision has led to some problems.  

•  The bodies mentioned in the legal basis 

The programme provides for operating grants to cofinance expenditure arising from the work 
programmes of the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary and the Network of the 
Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union, provided that the grants are 
used to achieve an objective of European general interest. 

•  The European Judicial Network; 

The programme is also designed to facilitate the operation of the European Judicial Network 
in civil and commercial matters established by Council Decision 2001/470/EC. 

MANAGEMENT OF THE PROGRAMME 

•  Financial resources 

Financial programming, in millions of euro, is as follows: 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012  2013  Total 

Civil Justice 

14.4  14.7  15.3  15.8  16.0  16.5  17.1  109.3

The relevant budget heading is 18.06.07. 

The Civil Justice programme receives a much higher allocation than the previous programme. 
The table below shows the difference in allocations between the programme on civil judicial 
cooperation (five years) and the current programme (first five years). However, it must not be 
forgotten that the current programme includes operating expenditure of the European judicial 
network and specific projects in the field of competition (€800 000 a year), which is managed 
by the Directorate-General for Competition. 

18000000

16000000

14000000

12000000

10000000

8000000

6000000

4000000

2000000

0

JUSTICE CIVILE 2007/2011
COOP. JUD. CIVILE 2002/2006

1

2

3

4

5

Green: Civil Justice 2007-2011 

Red: Civil judicial cooperation 2002-2006 

The graph on the next page shows the breakdown of the available budget between programme 
activities, year by year. 

Please note the rather modest allocations set aside for grants (specific transnational projects), 
which form the core of the programme. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
BREAKDOWN IN THE AVAILABLE BUDGET BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY 

EN 

7 

EN 

 
  
 
Blue: Projects at the initiative of the Commission 

Red: Grants for projects 

Green: Grants for competition projects 

Violet: Operating grants 

Pale blue: Operating grants referred to in the legal basis 

Orange: Network 

EN 

8 

EN 

 
  
•  The life-cycle of a project 

Like many European programmes, the Civil Justice programme, the ‘specific projects’ part at 
least, is implemented in a specific cycle lasting several years. The cycle starts in the first year 
with an annual work programme. 

The work programme is adopted by the Commission, assisted by the programme committee in 
accordance with the management procedure. At the informal meeting on 11 January 2011, the 
Member States' representatives all expressed a wish to be more involved in decision-making 
on the work programme, which is equivalent to a financing decision, and in project selection, 
though here the committee is acting only within the framework of the consultation procedure. 

The  work  programme  is  followed  by  calls  for  proposals,  the  selection  of  the  most  relevant 
projects,  the  signing  of  contracts  and  the  first  disbursements.  Execution  takes  place  in  the 
second year. After a maximum of two years of activity, the project leaders have three more 
months to present the final report and accounts. In other words, for a call issued in year n, the 
final payments are made in year n+2, or even n+3. 

The substance of the call is adapted each year to take account of new priorities set out in the 
annual work programme (linked to progress in Community work on civil justice) and of the 
experience of previous years. 

The different stages of the selection procedure, which may appear to be very long as it takes 
up to eight months between the publication of the call and the signing of the grant contracts, 
are as follows: 

The applications must be received at the latest by the date indicated in the call for proposals. 
Since  2008  applicants  have  been  asked  to  fill  in  their  forms  and  to  attach  all  the  necessary 
documents using an IT system called Priamos. 

Use of this system makes it possible to avoid handling paper files (thus several evaluators can 
work at the same time), to prevent files from being lost and to avoid complaints as regards the 
date of receipt. 

An internal selection committee consisting of Commission officials examines the proposals, 
checking the following in succession: 

•  exclusion and eligibility criteria 

•  selection criteria 

•  award criteria (the actual evaluation). 

The various criteria are set out in the calls for proposals, an example of which can be found in 
Annex 2 (work programme and call for proposals for 2010). 

If the proposals comply with the eligibility and selection conditions, the committee evaluates 
them and grades them according to the various award criteria. 

The  committee  classifies  the  eligible  proposals  according  to  the  marks  obtained  and, 
depending on the available budget, indicates the ones it recommends for selection. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
The  consultative  committee  provided  for  in  the  basic  decision  meets  to  discuss  the  above 
proposals.  To  date,  the  committee  has  issued  favourable  opinions  by  consensus  on  the 
proposals submitted to it in the calls for proposals for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. 

The meetings may be replaced by a written procedure. 

The  Commission  adopts  the  list  of  proposals  to  be  cofinanced  (Award  decision).  The  list 
shows  the  maximum  amounts  for  each  grant.  These  amounts  may  be  revised  if  the  budgets 
presented by the candidates are not completely eligible or correctly presented. 

As  soon  as  a  fully  eligible  budget  is  communicated  to  the  Commission,  the  necessary 
appropriations are committed and a grant agreement is presented to the potential beneficiary. 
The project can start following signature of the agreement by both parties. The first financing 
tranche, currently 70%, is then paid. 

The  projects  generally  last  for  12  to  24  months  starting  from  the  first  day  of  the  month 
following the date when the last of the two parties signs the grant agreement or an alternative 
date chosen by the beneficiary, where appropriate. 

Throughout  the  period  of  activity,  the  project  is  monitored  by  a  Commission  official  who 
deals with all questions raised by the beneficiary. 

Most of the questions raised by beneficiaries during the implementation of their projects are 
about the budget (increase in some costs or which heading to place costs under). 

Beneficiaries often want to extend the length of the project because they have not managed to 
complete  all  the  planned  activities  or  because  they  have  had  problems  in  organising  the 
conferences/seminars or getting all the participants/speakers together for a particular date. 

Sometimes one of the project partners decides to withdraw, thus jeopardising implementation 
of the project. 

Change  of  staff  (due  to  illness,  maternity  leave,  etc.)  is  another  problem  frequently 
encountered by project leaders. 

The  final  report  (concerning  the  technical  and  financial  aspects)  must  be  sent  by  the 
beneficiary to the Commission within three months of the end of the project, together with the 
request for final payment. 

The  balance  is  paid  within  45  days  following  the  approval  of  these  documents  by  the 
Commission. 

Project supervision is carried out in several stages. 

During the selection process: the Commission's financial services check that the budgets are 
eligible  and  correctly  laid  out.  Failing  this,  project  leaders  are  contacted  so  that  they  can 
correct  errors,  and  grant  agreements  are  concluded  only  when  all  the  budgetary  conditions 
have been met. 

During implementation of the projects, it is possible for a Commission official to take part in 
activities such as the conferences and seminars. No interim report is required, however. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
At the end of the projects, the balance is paid to the recipient only after approval of the final 
report by the Commission, with respect to both substance and financial aspects. 

Documentary  evidence  such  as  invoices,  etc.  supplied  with  the  report  is  examined  by  the 
financial services on a sample basis. 

COMMISSION INITIATIVES 

During  the  period  under  review,  actions  taken  at  the  initiative  of  the  Commission  were  as 
follows: 

•  Maintenance of Internet sites and databases already set up under the previous programme  

The European judicial atlas is an IT tool in the form of a data base that is accessible via the 
Internet  and  available  in  every  EU  official  language.  The  purpose  of  the  tool  is  to  provide 
user-friendly access to information relevant for judicial cooperation in civil matters. 

It enables professionals and the general public to easily identify which authorities to contact 
and is particularly useful for: 

•  finding courts with territorial jurisdiction 

•  serving documents 

•  taking evidence 

•  enforcing judgments 

•  other issues. 

Moreover, the procedures involved will be made easier where possible by giving users access 
to  an  IT  tool  based  on  forms  that  must  be  filled  in  when  applying  the  different  legal 
instruments. 

JURE is a database developed by the Commission and containing information on the case law 
of the European Court of Justice and Member States' courts, on the interpretation of Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  44/2001  of  22  December  2000  on  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  judgments  in  civil  and  commercial  matters,  and  on  the  interpretation  of  the 
1968 Brussels Convention and the 1988 Lugano Convention. 

It  is  a  powerful  search  tool  mainly  intended  to  facilitate  access  to  comprehensive,  regularly 
updated  information.  The  information  is  accessible  free  of  charge  to  all,  including  legal 
professionals from all over the EU. 

Summaries of the judgments in this database are available in German, English and French and 
in the language of origin of the judgment. 

JURE is updated constantly on the basis of contributions by legal professionals and revised by 
the Commission. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
•  Studies  

The  Commission  has  financed  a  series  of  studies  under  the  Civil  Justice  programme, 
including the following: 

A study carried out by the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law on the application of foreign 
law  by  courts  and  extrajudicial  authorities.  This  study  should  help  establish  whether  a 
common approach to this issue is desirable at European level and, if so, what should be done.  

A study on adoption lists adoption-related laws, procedures and practices in the 27 Member 
States  and  the  difficulties  encountered  by  European  citizens  who  wish  to  carry  out  an 
international  adoption.  This  study  will  consider  the  possibility  of  creating  a  European 
procedure for such cases. 

The  authors  of  a  study  on  legal  aid  will  focus  on  the  implementation  of  the  relevant  2003 
Directive and the 1980 Hague Convention. 

Another study under way will provided the basis for the Commission report provided for in 
the Rome I Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations. 

Lastly, a study has been sent to the Commission on the subject of crossborder debt recovery 
that  will  serve  for  the  drafting  of  the  Commission's  proposal  to  create  a  'European  freezing 
order'. 

•  Promotional and information activities  

The  'European  Day  of  Civil  Justice'  on  October  25  each  year,  which  is  organised  with  the 
Council of Europe, gives the public a chance to learn more about the working of civil justice 
and thus enable people to gain greater access to the courts Since 2007 this initiative has been 
coupled with the 'Crystal Scales of Justice' prize. 

•  Conferences  

An example is the joint conference in the field of family law organised by the Commission 
and the Hague Conference on Private International Law.  

SPECIFIC PROJECTS 

Between  2007  and  2010  158  proposals  for  specific  transnational  projects  were  received,  of 
which 86 were selected and 72 rejected. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Blue: Selected proposals 

Red: Rejected proposals 

These  projects  cover  a  wide  range  of  topics,  touching  on  almost  every  area  of  civil  justice. 
The topics covered most often are mediation and e-justice. 

•  Breakdown by type of beneficiary  

The following pie chart gives the breakdown of selected projects by type of beneficiary.  

Blue: Administration 

Red: Universities 

Green: Associations 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
•  Geographic breakdown 

Organisations of 19 of the 26 Member States participating in the programme (Denmark does 
not  take  part)  have  submitted  proposals  for  specific  projects  and  had  at  least  one  proposal 
selected. 

All  the  Member  States  apart  from  Denmark  and  Cyprus  have  been  involved  in  a  project  at 
least once, either as project leader or partner. 

That  said,  the  geographic  breakdown  needs  some  qualification:  organisations  of  just  five 
countries (Germany, Italy, Spain, Belgium and France) accounted for a little over two thirds 
of  the  proposals  received  since  2007  and  of  the  selected  projects.  Organisations  from  these 
countries are also the most frequent partners in projects led by others. 

Since the start of the programme German organisations have been the best represented at all 
levels of participation. Under the previous programme it was the Italians by a large margin. 

Organisations from countries such as Austria, Estonia, the Netherlands, Portugal and Romania 
often participate as partners. 

On  average,  a  project  brings  together  just  over  three  partners  from  different  countries, 
including the project leader. 

BE 
BG 
CZ 
DA 
DE 
EE 
IE 
GR 
ES 
FR
IT
CY 
LV 
LT
LU
HU 
MT
NL
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO 
SI 
SK 
FI
SE 
UK 
total

PROPOSALS 
16 
2
3
0
24 
0
2
1
19 
10 
22 
0
4
3
0
5
0
7
7
3
0
2
3
0
0
2
3
138

PROJECT LEADER PARTNER

PARTICIPATION 

14
1
3
0
14
0
1
1
12
6
11
0
2
3
0
4
0
2
5
1
0
2
1
0
0
2
1
86

14
9
7
0
26
12
0
0
13
15
20
0
6
4
2
7
3
13
15
10
13
10
7
5
3
0
8
222

28
10
10
0 
40
12
1 
1 
25
21
31
0 
8 
7 
2 
11
3 
15
20
11
13
12
8 
5 
3 
2 
9 

The tables below show the geographic breakdown of the projects selected. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
REPARTITION GEOGRAPHIQUE

17

14

12

14

11

12

6

BE
DE
ES
FR
IT
autres EUR 15 (10 EM)
 NEM (12 EM)

Red: Other EU15 (10 MS) 

Blue: New MS (12 MS) 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
EN 

16 

EN 

 
  
 
Blue: Proposals 

Red: Project leader 

EN 

17 

EN 

 
  
Blue: Project leader 

EN 

18 

EN 

 
  
 
 
Red: Partner 

Green: Participation 

EN 

19 

EN 

 
  
•  Breakdown by budget 

The table below gives a breakdown of the projects selected by the amount of cofinancing. The 
over-representation  of  projects  with  European  matching  funds  of  between  €101 000  and 
€200 000 is explained by the fact that the work  programmes for the first two years had a cap 
of €200 000. 

Title: Community financing 

Blue: Selected proposals 

Columns:  under  €100 000,  from  €101  000 
€301 000 to €400 000, from €401 000 to 500 000. 

to  200 000,  from  €201 000  to  €300 000,  from 

SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN THE FIELD OF COMPETITION LAW 

The annual work programmes earmark a budget of €800 000 each year to cofinance specific 
projects on the implementation of European competition law. 

The  selected  projects  concerned  judicial  cooperation  between  national  judges  and  their 
training in various aspects of European competition law, in particular the rules applicable to 
undertakings and state aid. 

Most  projects  involved  training  activities,  whether  in  the  form  of  conferences/seminars  or 
training in the strict sense of the term. 

The table below lists grant beneficiaries over the last three years: 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
 
BENEFICIARIES 2007 - 2009

1

11

8

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2007 Academy of European Law ERA Germany, CEP Germany, DECO Portugal, European Institute of Cyprus, FIEP
Bulgaria, IECL University of Oxford, IPP PF Slovenia, TRENTO Italy, University of West England UK, ASMOZ Spain,
JEMOLO Italy

2008 Academy of European Law ERA Germany, IECL University of Oxford, MEUSAC Malta, University of Lisbon
Portugal, HCA Hungary, CODACONS Italy, FLJTC Latvia, CSS Lithuania

2009 Academy of European Law ERA Germany, FIEP Bulgaria, HCA Hungary, University of Padua Italy, Athens
University Greece, Pazmany Peter Catholic University Hungary, University of Rome Italy, UCL London UK, Utrecht
University The Netherlands, EUI Italy

The  Academy  of  European  Law  (ERA)  in  Trier  has  carried  out  almost  half  the  training 
projects cofinanced (13 of 29). 

Judges of all EU nationalities have received training. 

Since  2007,  when  competition  law  was  added  to  the  Civil  Justice  Programme,  a  growing 
number  of  judges  (and  public  prosecutors  and  other  legal  professionals)  have  received 
training: 499 in 2007, 678 in 2008, and 747 in 2009. 

OPERATING GRANTS 

•  Grants awarded following a call for proposals 

The possibility of cofinancing the work programmes of NGOs did not attract many offers in 
the first three years (19), of which only a few were selected (six different organisations were 
selected in the first three years, one three times and another twice). 

As not enough of the funds earmarked for such actions were committed (approximately 30%, 
50%  and  60%  of  the  funds  available  during  the  first  three  years  of  the  programme),  the 
Commission radically cut the indicative allocation from 2011 on (down to €150 000 instead 
of €500 000). 

We  will  return  to  the  reasons  for  this  lack  of  interest  and  the  lessons  to  be  drawn  in  the 
conclusions of this report. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

PROPOSITIONS
SELECTIONS

2007

2008

2009

Green: Proposals 

Red: Selected 

•  Grants to bodies referred to in the basic decision 

Article  4(d)  of  the  Decision  of  25  September  2007  provides  for  the  possibility  of  awarding 
operating  grants  to  two  named  networks:  the  European  Network  of  the  Presidents  of  the 
Supreme Judicial  Courts of the European Union and  the European Network of  Councils for 
the  Judiciary.  This  provision  merely  means  that  these  organisations  are  not  required  to 
compete in a call for proposals. However, they must submit a work programme at the start of 
the  year  and  a  final  report;  these  are  scrutinised  by  the  Commission  before  it  pays  any 
prefinancing or the balance. 

The Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union wished to meet as an 
association,  the  Constituent  Assembly  of  which  was  held  on  10 March  2004  at  the  French 
Court  of  Cassation  with  financial  support  from  the  European  Commission  (AGIS 
programme). 

The  Presidents'  Network  offers  European  authorities  the  opportunity  of  consulting  the 
Supreme  Courts  and  the  Courts  benefit  from  occasions  that  stimulate  debate.  Its  members 
meet  at  conferences  to  discuss  issues  of  common  interest  and  courses  are  organised  for 
members  of  supreme  courts  within  the  framework  of  the  Exchange  Programme  for  Judicial 
Authorities in conjunction with the European Judicial Training Network. 

Since  2006  the  Network  has  developed,  with  the  support  of  the  European  Commission,  a 
shared  case-law  portal  of  the  Supreme  Courts  that  will  enable  members  to  search  all  the 
national case-law databases. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
The  activities  of  this  network  are  of  particular  importance  in  the  field  covered  by  the  Civil 
Justice Programme, especially its case-law portal. 

The grant to the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary enabled it to constitute itself 
as an association in 2008 and commence activity. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

•  Conclusions 

The programme started up little more than three years ago and few of the initiatives financed 
have been completed. It is thus still too early to make an in-depth analysis of the programme's 
impact and results.  

However,  it  can  be  seen  already  that  the  projects  financed,  both  those  undertaken  at  the 
initiative  of  the  Commission  and  specific  projects,  are  contributing  to  the  fulfilment  of  the 
programme's objectives and, more generally, respond to the Commission's desire to promote 
knowledge of European law in the field of civil justice and its correct implementation. 

Major  Commission  initiatives  already  under  way  (the  Judicial  Atlas,  database,  information 
campaigns,  conferences  and  studies)  are  designed  to  keep  legal  professionals,  and  even  the 
general  public,  informed  about  recent  developments  in  European  civil  law  in  various 
complementary  ways.  Particular  emphasis  is  laid  on  practical  and  relevant  information  that 
can be accessed using new communication technologies. 

The possibility of cofinancing NGOs' work programmes, which has a more limited share of 
the  budget,  attracted  only  a  few  applications  in  the  first  three  years  and  of  those  only  six 
organisations were selected. 

There is no doubt about the relevance of the objectives of the Civil Justice Programme, which 
extends the impact of the legislative work of the Commission and sometimes provides inputs 
upstream. Like previous programmes, the Civil Justice Programme plays an important role in 
supporting European justice policy. The activities financed with quite modest grants help civil 
society organisations and Member States to make an effective contribution to the formulation 
and smooth implementation of European law. 

In addition, the programme is efficiently managed, despite the limited human resources, as the 
Commission's partners generally agree.  

•  Recommendations 

There are still some recommendations that could be made to make the programme even more 
effective, however. 

•  How can the programme be made more attractive? 

While the quality of the projects financed appears indisputable, it must be admitted that not 
many proposals are received and their geographic spread is not very wide (see graphs above). 
The Commission has received just over 150 proposals in four years whereas it was expecting 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
between 100 and 150 in the first year (this figure, given in the work programmes under the 
heading 'expected results', was revised downwards after three years). 

There are various explanations for this, the main ones being: 

•  the  very  technical  nature  of  the  topics  covered  by  the  programme  (much  more  technical 
than Daphne III, Fundamental Rights and Justice or even Criminal Justice), which means 
that only the 'initiated' submit proposals; 

•  small  organisations  have  difficulty  in  finding  partners  and  their  own  sources  of 

cofinancing; 

•  the programme is little known outside the inner circle of 'clients';  

•  potential candidates' fear of complex procedures. 

While  the  first  of  these  difficulties  is  intrinsic  to  the  very  nature  of  the  programme,  it  is 
possible to deal with the three others by doing two things: 

- better publicising the programme, particularly through presentations in the Member States to 
reach more grassroots organisations and tell them how to apply, how to design a good project 
and how to find partners. The Commission works in partnership with the national authorities 
concerned, which are responsible for bringing together the relevant associations. Visits of this 
type to several Member States since 2008 have raised participation from these States. 

- simplifying procedures. Desired by all stakeholders, simplification is an exercise that must 
unite  the  requirements  of  transparency,  sound  financial  management  and  equal  treatment  of 
partners. Current procedures lead to unacceptably long delays between the publication of calls 
for  proposals  and  the  start-up  of  projects.  They  are  caused  by  a  plethora  of  administrative 
steps  that  are  disproportionate  to  the  amounts  involved  (deadline  for  submitting  proposals, 
internal procedures of the Commission, discussions on budgets with the recipients, committee 
procedures, etc.). 

•  Better defined priorities that are more in line with the Commission's policy priorities  

The  setting  of  priorities  should  focus  more  on  political  activities  and  promote  projects  that 
meet these priorities. 

More attention should be paid to the dissemination of project results in order to ensure better 
visibility of both the results and the programme as a whole. 

•  More European added value 

Financing should be concentrated on projects that have a real European dimension and offer 
the most significant European added value. To achieve this objective we should finance larger 
projects.  To  do  this  the  necessary  provisions  should  be  incorporated  in  the  annual  work 
programmes and the next basic decision. 

The  Commission's  proposed  basic  decision  for  the  current  programme  required  the 
participation of at least three States, while the final text provides for no more than two (and 
even 'national' projects may be accepted under the Criminal Justice programme).  

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
•  Operating grants 

As  noted  above,  the  operating  grants  component  of  the  programme  has  so  far  produced 
disappointing results, which may be attributable to declining enthusiasm for this type of grant, 
but another reason is the fact that most of the proposals received tend to be closer to specific 
projects than annual work programmes. In addition, the European dimension is very difficult 
to identify in this type of activity (except for the true European networks which were the main 
target of the Commission's proposal). 

Given the workload  created  by  the  publication of an annual call for  proposals for  operating 
grants and the results obtained, the Commission should consider discontinuing this in 2014. 

•  Links between the programmes: should they be merged? 

Various  ways  of  reforming  the  programme  may  be  considered  with  an  eye  to  the  next 
financial  programming  period  starting  in  2014,  including  a  merger  with  the  twin  Criminal 
Justice  programme.  The  programmes  were  kept  separate  in  2007  because  of  their  different 
legal bases, which called for different adoption procedures, but this is no longer the case since 
the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. 

Accordingly,  the  Commission  might  consider  proposing  a  'Justice'  programme  bringing 
together the current Civil and Criminal Justice programmes.  

EN 

25 

   EN