REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 28th ANNUAL REPORT ON MONITORING THE APPLICATION OF EU LAW (2010)
Date: 2011-09-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, EU programme, EU statistics, administration of the Institutions, administrative offence, complaint to the Commission, drafting of EU law, infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, sanction (EU)

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 29.9.2011 
COM(2011) 588 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

28th ANNUAL REPORT ON MONITORING THE APPLICATION OF EU LAW 
(2010) 

{SEC(2011) 1093 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1094 final} 

 
 
 
 
  
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Commission’s 28th Annual Report 2010 on monitoring the application of EU law focuses 
on strategic issues and evaluating the current state of the law, in line with the general format 
for  annual  reporting  as  defined  by  the  2007  Commission  Communication  on  'A  Europe  of 
results – Applying Community law' (the '2007 Communication')1. 

The Report follows a similar structure as in previous years2. 

2. 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

2.1.  Major new features in infringement management  

In  2010  the  Commission  continued  to  implement,  complete  and  fine-tune  the  reform  of  its 
infringement  management  as  initiated  by  the  2007  Communication,  in  all  the  four  domains 
identified for further improvements.  

Special  emphasis  was  laid  on  the  efficient  management  of  cases  through  consistent  further 
development and evaluation of the functioning of EU Pilot, the tool for dialogue and problem-
solving with the Member States. This built on action already undertaken in 2009 by putting in 
place a new registration system (CHAP 'Complaints Handling – Accueil des Plaignants') for 
complaints  and  enquiries  on  the  application  of  EU  law  by  a  Member  State  (for  more 
explanations on CHAP and EU Pilot, see 3.2).  

The  Commission  also  stepped  up  its  preventive  measures,  for  example,  by  including 
prospective  application  of  EU  law  in  its  impact  assessments  for  new  initiatives  and  by 
promoting implementation plans to support the transposition process for new directives (see 
3.4). 

The  entry  into  force  of  the  Lisbon  Treaty  brought  important  changes  in  infringement 
management.  One  of  these  novelties  is  the  possibility  for  the  Commission  to  request,  at  an 
earlier stage of the procedure, financial sanctions against Member States for failure to notify 
measures  transposing  a  directive  adopted  under  a  legislative  procedure  (Article  260  TFEU, 
third paragraph). In  2010 the Commission  outlined its  policy on the application of this new 
instrument in a Communication3 (see 3.1.1). 

Finally,  the  adoption  of  the  revised  Framework  Agreement  on  the  relations  between  the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Commission4  resulted  in  more  comprehensive  provisions  on 
information and cooperation in the area of infringements policy (3.6.). 

1 
2 

3 
4 

COM(2007)502 final. 
For previous reports, please see:  
http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/infringements/infringements_annual_report_en.htm  
OJ C 12, 15.1.2011, p. 1. 
OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2. 

General statistics 

In 2010, the acquis of the EU consisted of ca. 8400 regulations and nearly 2000 directives in 
addition to the primary law (the Treaties). 

As in previous years, this Annual Report5 provides an overview of key statistical data on the 
management of cases related to the application of EU law by the Commission. However for 
correct  interpretation  of  these  data,  it  is  important  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  Commission  has 
introduced  two  new  management  (pre-infringement)  tools  in  this  field:  CHAP  (registry  of 
complaints  and  enquiries)  and  EU  Pilot  (problem-solving  with  Member  States).  For  more 
details on the new management tools see 3.2.  

Previously, a single ‘infringement database’ (NIF) contained all types of cases regardless of 
their origin and the stage in the procedure. In the medium term, the latter database will only 
contain cases where the Commission has taken formal steps starting with the letter of formal 
notice addressed to the Member State under Article 258 TFEU. Currently, it still contains a 
certain  number  of  pre-infringement  cases  (in  particular  complaints)  which  under  the  new 
system would have been processed in CHAP and EU Pilot. 

2.2.1.  Number of cases according to their origin 

At  the  end  of  2010  the  infringement  database  contained  nearly  2100  active  infringement 
cases. Compared with the same figure for the end of the previous year (nearly 2900 cases), the 
number  of  ongoing  proceedings  fell  by  almost  30%.  This  is  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  new 
complaints and new own initiative cases are registered and dealt with in either the CHAP or 
the  EU  Pilot  databases  (see  figures  from  these  databases  under  3.2).  The  success  rate  for 
problem-solving in EU Pilot also contributed significantly to the reduction in the number of 
infringement  proceedings  for  those  Member  States,  which  participated  in  EU  Pilot  since  its 
implementation in April 2008. 

The  general  use  of  pre-infringement  tools  for  the  handling  of  complaints  and  own  initiative 
cases  has  changed  the  composition  of  cases  in  the  infringement  database  as  regards  their 
origin. At the end of 2009, 53% of the active cases originated from complaints; this figure has 
decreased (by more than 10%) to slightly more than 40% in 2010.  

739  open  cases  (around  35%  of  all  cases)  originated  from  the  Commission’s  own  initiative 
cases. This is less than the number in 2009 (925). However, the figure is affected by the fact 
that the Commission services now handle new own initiative-based cases in principle first via 
EU Pilot. 

The 470 open non-communication cases6 represent 22% of the total of active cases. Compared 
with  the  same  data  for  2009,  there  is  an  increase  in  absolute  terms:  only  407  non-
communication cases were open at the end of  2009. This may be explained  partially  by the 
fact that the transposition agenda in 2010 included more directives than in 2009 (see 3.1.1). 

5 

6 

The present report introduces the key figures; the accompanying Commission Staff Working Document, 
{SEC(2011) 1094 final} contains more comprehensive data 
Cases where the Member State concerned failed to fulfil its obligation to notify measures to transpose a 
directive. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Commission  closed  987  complaint-based  and  own  initiative  cases  during  2010  (2009: 
1389).  Most  of  these  closures  (431  decisions)  occurred  before  sending  the  letter  of  formal 
notice  to  the  Member  State  and  came  about  because  the  Member  States  took  appropriate 
action in response to the Commission in order to comply with EU law. 

A further 312 cases were closed after sending the letter of formal notice and before sending a 
reasoned opinion to the Member State (2009: 341) and 130 after sending the reasoned opinion 
but before referring the matter to the Court of Justice (2009: 151). Thus, these above figures 
show that in 88% of the closures, the case did not reach the Court of Justice because Member 
States  corrected  the  legal  issues  raised  by  the  Commission  before  it  would  have  been 
necessary to initiate the next stage in the infringement proceedings. 

2.2.2.  Number of cases across Member States and policy areas 

Italy is the Member State against which the most infringement proceedings were ongoing by 
the  end  of  2010  (176  open  cases),  followed  by  Belgium  (159)  and  Greece  (157).  Malta, 
Lithuania  and  Latvia  are  the  three  Member  States  with  the  lowest  number  of  open 
infringements  cases  (25,  27  and  32  cases,  respectively).  Italy  and  Greece  were  also  the 
Member States against which the most new infringement proceedings were started in 2010 (90 
and 89, respectively), followed by the United Kingdom (75 new cases in 2010). The fewest 
new  proceedings  (19)  were  opened  against  Lithuania  in  2010;  Denmark  and  Malta  ranked 
second and third with 22 and 25 new cases, respectively. And even though Italy and Greece 
were able to close approximately 40% of their new cases in the same year, they carried over 
the most new cases to 2011 (49 and 50 cases, respectively). The number of cases to be carried 
over was also relatively high for Poland and Spain (40 new cases each). The smallest carry-
over took place for Malta (8), Denmark (10) and Lithuania (11). 

The three most infringement-prone  policy areas (environment, internal market and taxation) 
account for 52% of all infringement  cases. More than one fifth  of all active cases (444) are 
associated  with  environmental  legislation,  with  internal  market  and  taxation  cases  (326  and 
324, respectively) each amounting to 15% of all infringements. 

However  it  was  not  in  any  of  the  above  three  policy  areas  that  the  most  new  infringement 
proceedings  were  opened  in  2010.  It  was  in  the  sector  of  health  and  consumer  protection 
where  most  of  the  new  opened  cases  (273)  were  non-communication  cases  (254).  Dossiers 
relating to environment and internal market gave rise to the second and third highest number 
in 2010 (229 and 191 cases, respectively). However, the Commission closed the majority of 
the  new  non-communication  cases  on  health  and  consumer  protection  by  the  end  of  2010, 
leaving only 62 active. By contrast, around two thirds of the new proceedings were still open 
in  the  fields  of  environment,  internal  market  and  transport  (148,  131  and  116  cases, 
respectively), where the carry-over of new cases to 2011 was the highest. 

2.3. 

Petitions 

Similarly  to  last  year,  the  environmental  area  attracted  the  most  petitions  lodged  with  the 
European  Parliament  (120).  Problems  relating  to  the  environmental  impact  assessment  of 
projects  alone  were  the  subject  of  42  petitions,  followed  by  nature  conservation  (32)  and 
waste  management  (20).  In  the  area  of  water  quality  and  marine  resources  an  additional  14 
petitions were lodged. A significant number of petitions were related to justice, fundamental 
rights and citizenship (61), half of them on the free movement of persons. Internal market and 
services  also  accounted  for  a  substantial  portion  of  petitions  (49),  where  professional 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
qualifications (13) and freedom to provide services (11) remained the sectors with the highest 
inflow. Several petitions raised tax issues (44), especially in the area of indirect taxation (33). 
Employment-related questions also ranked very high: out of 36 petitions, 32 were about the 
free movement of workers and the coordination of social security systems. 

For  example,  petitions  to  the  European  Parliament  led  to  infringement  proceedings  on 
discriminatory  rules  for  levying  inheritance  tax,  on  the  activities  and  supervision  of 
institutions  for  occupational  retirement  provisions  and  on  discrimination  against  long  term 
residents. 

As  incorrect  environmental  impact  assessment  is a  leading  cause  of  petitions,  it  is  useful  to 
mention  the  scope  of  application  in  time  in  the  EU-12  Member  States.  The  relevant  EU 
directive (85/337/EEC7) applies only to projects whose authorisation was requested after the 
accession dates of the new Member States (i.e. 1 May 2004 and 1 January 2007).  

An  increasing  number  of  petitions  drew  the  Commission's  attention  to  malfunctions  in  the 
application  of  Directive  2004/80/EC  on  compensation  for  victims  of  violent  intentional 
crime8,  especially  in  Italy  and  Greece.  Importation  of  second-hand  vehicles  and  the 
registration taxes charged by Member States also continued to fuel petitions. 

Conclusion: In general the number of ongoing infringement proceedings decreased in 2010 
compared  with  previous  years.  Although  at  this  stage  it  is  not  possible  to  identify  all  the 
reasons for this tendency, one explanation is the setting up of EU Pilot, which helps to clarify 
and  solve  satisfactorily  some  issues  regarding  application  of  EU  law  raised  by  the 
Commission, thus putting an end to problems without being necessary to launch infringement 
proceedings. Environment, internal market and taxation legislation remain at  the top of the 
policy fields involved in infringements, whilst issues related to environment, free movement of 
persons and fundamental rights attracted the most petitions to the European Parliament. 

3. 

KEY ISSUES 

3.1. 

Late Transposition  

3.1.1.  Overall policy development 

On average Member States had to transpose more directives in 2010 than in 2009 (i.e. 111 as 
compared to 71 directives). In parallel, the Commission had to launch a considerably higher 
number of non-communication cases in 2010 (855 cases) than in 2009 (531). Although more 
than half of these newly opened non-communication cases could be closed, 410 still remained 
unresolved at the end of 2010. So, together with the remaining 60 non-communication cases 
accumulated  from  previous  years,  a  total  of  470  non-communication  cases  were  pending  at 
the end of 2010. 

This last figure represents a nearly 15% increase in the number of open non-communication 
cases since the beginning of 2010, when there were only 407 such cases. 

7 

8 

Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and 
private projects on the environment, OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. 
Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims, OJ L 261, 
6.8.2004, p. 15. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  transposition  process  is  managed  most  effectively  in  Denmark  and  Malta  (5  open  non-
communication  cases  each),  whilst  it  takes  more  time  in  Italy  (34  cases)  and  Poland  (32 
cases). 

Very frequently, a large number of Member States miss the transposition deadline for a given 
directive. Once the Commission opens the infringement proceedings, notification of national 
measures  increase  sharply,  which  allows  the  proceedings  to  be  closed.  Out  of  the  792  non-
communication cases closed by the Commission in 2010, 558 proceedings were closed after 
sending  a  letter  of  formal  notice  and  before  sending  a  reasoned  opinion  to  Member  States. 
Thereafter, further delayed transposition occurs only in a minority of Member States. 

The  Commission  will  be  able  to  deal  more  effectively  with  concerns  stemming  from  long-
term  delays  via  the  application  of  Article  260(3)  TFEU.  This  provision  allows  the  Court  to 
apply  financial  sanctions  already  at  the  stage  of  the  first  referral  to  the  Court  under  Article 
258 TFEU, against a Member State failing to transpose a legislative directive, if so requested 
in the application by the Commission. Previously, financial sanctions for non-communication 
cases could only be applied in a two-stage procedure, i.e. if a Member State failed to comply 
with  an  earlier  judgment  of  the  Court.  In  its  Communication9  on  the  use  of  Article  260(3) 
TFEU, the Commission made clear that it will make use of this new provision. It is hoped that 
this  will  contribute  significantly  to  enhancing  the  timely  transposition  of  EU  law  by  the 
Member States.  

3.1.2. 

Sector-specific aspects 

Judging  from  the  number  of  cases,  it  appears  that  transposition  delays  occur  mainly  in  the 
fields  of  environment  (115  active  cases),  transport  (104)  and  internal  market  and  services 
(78). 

As regards EU environmental legislation, deadlines are regularly missed by a large number of 
Member  States,  normally  resolved  after  the  launch  of  infringement  proceedings,  and 
protracted  delays  can  be  seen  in  a  minority  of  Member  States.  An  example  of  particularly 
slow  transposition  is  Directive  2004/35/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on 
environmental  liability  with  regard  to  the  prevention  and  remedying  of  environmental 
damage10. Just four Member States transposed it on time and the European Court of Justice 
had to deliver judgments against seven Member States. 

In 2010 transposition of directives governing the internal market generally showed the same 
characteristics that can be observed across the other policy areas. However, following periods 
of intense legislative activity in 2009 and 2010, particularly in the field of financial services, 
the  Commission  was  faced  with  a  sharp  increase  in  non-communication  cases  in  this  area. 
Late  transposition  was  often  due  to  the  broad  scope  of  the  legislation  concerned.  (Services 
Directive  2006/123/EC11;  IORP  Directive  2003/41/EC12)  or,  for  instance,  in  the  banking 
sector, where the legislator set relatively short deadlines for transposition (between 1 and 15 
months) because of the urgency of responding to the financial crisis. 

9 
10 
11 

12 

OJ C 12, 15.1.2011, p. 1. 
OJ L 143, 30. 4. 2004, p. 56. 
Directive  2006/123/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  12  December  2006  on 
services in the internal market, OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36. 
Directive 2003/41/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 June 2003 on the activities 
and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision, OJ L 235, 23.09.2003, p. 10. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Late  transposition  frequently  affects  transport  directives,  particularly  those  regulating  road 
and maritime transport. In this respect, Member States informed the Commission services of 
the  following  reasons  for  late  transposition:  lack  of  sufficient  expertise  and  resources  and 
complex  internal  decision-making  processes  in  the  Member  States.  Member  States  also  call 
for more support from the Commission in the period between entry into force and the deadline 
for transposition. 

Timely  transposition  is  also  a  key  issue  for  judicial  cooperation,  fundamental  rights  and 
citizenship.  Since  part  of  these  areas  belonged  earlier  to  the  former  third  pillar,  the 
Commission  has  to  apply  both  directives  and  framework  decisions  in  this  field.  In  many 
directive-based sectors, including free movement of persons, citizenship and gender equality, 
complete  notification  has  already  been  achieved.  In  2010,  consumer  protection  could  be 
added  to  this  list,  by  closing  the  last  infringement  procedure  due  to  full  or  partial  failure  to 
transpose  Directive  2005/29/EC  on  unfair  commercial  practices13.  By  contrast,  former  third 
pillar  sectors  that  are  governed  by  pre-Lisbon  framework  decisions  lag  behind  with 
transposition.  The  Commission  may  not  initiate  infringement  proceedings  based  on  these 
framework decisions for a period of five years starting from the entry into force of the Lisbon 
Treaty14. 

Problems with late transposition are rare in policy areas having a stable acquis of directives 
(e.g. agricultural policy). EU legislation in the fields of enterprise and industry, employment 
and social affairs, as well as indirect taxation are other areas for which no major difficulties 
regarding timely transposition are observed. 

Conclusion: There are still clearly identified areas where late transposition of directives is a 
frequent  pattern,  such  as  environment,  internal  market,  transport  and  judicial  cooperation, 
fundamental rights and citizenship. The Lisbon Treaty has given an additional instrument to 
the Commission that could help to change this unsatisfactory situation (Article 260(3) TFEU). 

3.2. 

Improved  working  methods  for  the  management  of  cases  relating  to  the 
application of EU law 

CHAP: 
With the introduction of CHAP in September 2009, the Commission now has 
an IT tool which is specifically designed for the registration and management of complaints 
and enquiries by European citizens on the application of EU law by a Member State. CHAP 
ensures  proper  and  timely  assignment  of  complaints  to  the  competent  Commission 
departments  as  well  as  systematic  feedback  to  the  complainants  in  line  with  the  2002 
Communication  on  relations  with  the  complainant  regarding  infringements  of  Community 
law15. 

4035  cases  were  created  in  CHAP  in  2010  (83%  complaints  and  17%  enquiries).  The  five 
Member States most concerned are: Italy (12%), Spain (11.4%), Germany (9.5%), the United 
Kingdom (7.5%) and France (6.9%). 

13 

14 
15 

Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair 
business-to-consumer  commercial  practices  in  the  internal  market  and  amending  Council  Directive 
84/450/EEC,  Directives  97/7/EC,  98/27/EC  and  2002/65/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 149, 
11.6.2005, p. 22. 
Article 10 of Protocol No 36 
COM(2002)141 final, OJ C 244 , 10.10.2002 p. 5. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
52.5% of complaints were closed directly in CHAP on the basis of a comprehensive response 
by the Commission and a further 14% were closed on the grounds of lack of EU competence. 
For 17% of the cases  the examination continued via EU Pilot and 9% were transferred into 
infringement proceedings. 

EU Pilot: 
The  EU  Pilot  project  has  been  operating  since  April  2008  with  the  aim  of 
providing  quicker  and  better  answers  to  questions  raised  by  citizens  or  businesses  and 
solutions to those problems arising in the application of EU law. It is also designed to improve 
communication  and  cooperation  between  the  Commission  services  and  Member  State 
authorities  on  the  application,  implementation  of  EU  law  or  the  conformity  of  the  law  in  a 
Member State with EU law.  

The  Commission  services  can  lodge  enquiries  and  complaints  received  from  citizens  and 
businesses  as  well  as  own-initiative  cases  in  EU  Pilot.  This  includes  issues  raised  with  the 
Commission in the European Parliament Petitions' Committee or via a letter from a Member 
of the European Parliament. 

Since its implementation, EU Pilot has proved very positive and shows how the Commission 
and the participating Member States are cooperating to find solutions that give full and quick 
effect to EU law for the benefit of citizens and businesses. The Commission examines every 
case and launches infringement proceedings if no solution compatible with EU law is found. 
On  31  December  2010,  81%  of  the  responses  provided  by  the  Member  States  had  been 
assessed as acceptable16 by the Commission while ca 160 cases were transferred to the NIF 
database in order to allow the Commission to launch the infringement proceeding by sending 
a letter of formal notice under Art.258 TFUE. 

In 2008, 15 Member States volunteered to participate in EU Pilot. Following the success of 
the project, the Commission decided in its first EU Pilot Evaluation Report adopted in March 
201017 to invite the remaining 12 Member States to join the project. At the end of 2010, three 
further Member States joined the project18. 

Commission databases for the management of cases relating to the application of EU law 

Complaints/Enquiries  are  registered  first  in  CHAP,  and  then  transferred  to  EU  Pilot  for  the 
participating  Member  States  if  the  Commission  needs  to  obtain  further  factual  or  legal 
information  or  to  provide  the  Member  State  in  question  with  an  opportunity  to  submit  a 
solution complying with EU law. If no solution complying with EU law is found, the cases 
are subsequently transferred into the infringement database NIF. 

The Commission’s own initiative (ex-officio) cases start in EU Pilot for participating Member 
States  and,  subsequently,  if  they  could  not  be  solved,  they  are  transferred  into  the 
infringement database NIF. 

16 

17 
18 

"Acceptable" means that on the basis of the information received the Commission can envisage closing 
the file. 
COM(2010)70 final. 
The 18 Member States are: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Finland, 
Hungary,  Ireland,  Italy,  Lithuania,  the  Netherlands,  Portugal,  Slovakia,  Slovenia,  Sweden,  Spain  and 
the United Kingdom. The process continues in 2011. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Non-communication cases are registered directly and only in the infringement database NIF, 
as they are clear-cut cases for which the use of EU Pilot would not provide added value. 

For  Member  States  which  are  not  yet  participating  to  EU  Pilot,  pre-infringement 
correspondence still happens by classical administrative means. 

Conclusion: The Commission will develop further its databases for the management of cases 
related to the application of EU law. The Commission will explore the extension of EU Pilot 
as  an  instrument  of  problem-solving  and  prevention  to  all  Member  States.  The  general 
approach  pursued  by  the  Commission  is  to  ensure  systematic  registration  of  all 
complaints/enquiries on the application of EU law, to seek swift problem-solving by using EU 
Pilot and, where necessary, to launch and pursue vigorously infringement proceedings. 

3.3. 

Enforcement issues 

According to Article 17 TEU, the Commission has a unique and essential role in overseeing 
the application of EU law. It is part of the Commission's core task to 'ensure the application 
of  the  Treaties  and  of  the  measures  adopted  by  the  institutions  pursuant  to  them'.  The 
possibilities to launch Article 258 TFEU infringement proceedings against Member States and 
the Article 260 TFEU proceeding with financial sanctions where Member States are persisting 
to infringe Union law are indeed important instruments in this context. 

Only in few areas, however, is the Commission entitled to examine compliance with EU rules 
directly on the ground. These areas include the collection of the Union’s own resources from 
VAT, which is the responsibility of the budget services assisted by experts from the taxation 
field. Food safety, animal health and welfare and plant welfare requirements can be checked 
on the spot by the Food and Veterinary Office of the Commission. Specialised EU agencies in 
cooperation  with  the  Commission  maritime  and  air  transport  services  inspect  safety  and 
security in the maritime and aviation sector. Nuclear installations are also subject to periodic 
inspections by the Commission services19. 

The possibility for the Commission to impose financial corrections on Member States is also 
limited to special fields. The Commission may resort to the clearance of accounts procedure 
in agriculture, if EU funding is involved, by excluding from EU financing expenditure which 
has  not  been  incurred  in  conformity  with  EU  rules.  A  similar  tool  is  in  place  to  ensure  the 
proper running of EU co-financed projects in the area of regional policy.  

In spite of these limitations, it is important to bear in mind that EU law forms an integral part 
of  the  national  legal  order  in  the  Member  States,  regardless  of  whether  the  EU  rules  are 
directly  applicable  (e.g.  regulations)  or  require  prior  transposition  into  national  law 
(directives). It follows that the onus for the correct application of EU law is primarily on the 
Member States' administration and judiciary, which have to ensure that rights and obligations 
for citizens and businesses are properly enforced. 

National  authorities  often  enjoy  wide  discretion  in  how  to  organise  these  enforcement 
mechanisms,  including  the  sanctions  for  non-compliance.  The  European  legislature  and  the 

19 

This report does not cover competition policy where the Commission has particular instruments at its 
disposal for compliance control. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Commission  can,  however,  promote  effective  law  application  at  Member  State  level  in 
various ways. 

For example, in the passenger rights area, as a reaction to the crisis caused by the volcanic 
ash cloud, which paralysed the European airspace in spring 2010, the Commission rapidly met 
with the national enforcement authorities to ensure, through agreed guidelines, a balanced and 
uniform  interpretation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  261/200420  on  air  passenger  rights,  in 
particular,  on  the  assistance  stranded  passengers  were  entitled  to  receive  from  airline 
companies. 

Furthermore, existing EU legislation and international agreements require Member States to 
provide  for  access  to  redress  mechanisms  in  certain  areas.  In  the  environmental  area,  the 
proposal  to  revise  the  Seveso  Directive21  contains  rules  on  access  to  justice  that  are  in  line 
with  the  Aarhus  Convention.  Such  broader  access  to  justice  provisions  will  continue  to 
operate under the recast Directive on industrial emissions (2010/75/EU22). The appeal rules in 
information society measures (Directive 2002/21/EC23) and the corresponding case law define 
a  broad  group  of  interested  persons  who  may  contest  decisions  by  national  authorities  and 
courts.  Home  affairs  legislation  (e.g.  Employers’  Sanctions  Directive  2009/52/EC24)  obliges 
Member  States  to  allow  third  parties  (for  example,  trade  unions)  to  intervene  on  behalf  of 
employees involved in administrative or civil proceedings. Migration rules make it mandatory 
to  give  reasons  for  refusing  an  application  for  a  residence  permit  and  to  inform  applicants 
about possible redress mechanisms and time limits. Refusals of visa applications have to be 
justified as well. 

Some  recent  EU  directives  require  Member  States  to  open  up  additional  or  alternative 
channels  for  dispute  resolution.  In  the  area  of  internal  market,  the  Directive  on  the 
coordination  of  laws,  regulations  and  administrative  provisions  relating  to  undertakings  for 
collective investment  in  transferable securities ('UCITS  IV  Directive'  2009/65/EC25) obliges 
Member States to operate efficient and effective complaints and redress procedures for out-of-
court settlement of consumer disputes. Directive 2007/66/EC  on the effectiveness of  review 
procedures concerning the award of public contracts26 ensures via common standards that all 
participants  in  public  tenders  have  the  necessary  remedies  in  all  Member  States  to  protect 
their rights under EU law. Consumer protection rules are still a major area where remedies are 
rooted in EU law with the European Small Claims procedure (Regulation 861/200727) and the 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 
26 
27 

Regulation  (EC)  No  261/2004  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11  February  2004 
establishing  common  rules  on  compensation  and  assistance  to  passengers  in  the  event  of  denied 
boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, OJ L 46, 17.2.2004, p. 1. 
Directive 2003/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2003 amending 
Council Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, 
OJ L 345 , 31.12.2003, p. 97. 
Directive  2010/75/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  24  November  2010  on 
industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control), OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17. 
Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common 
regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, OJ L 108, 24.4.2002 p. 33. 
Directive  2009/52/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18  June  2009  providing  for 
minimum  standards  on  sanctions  and  measures  against  employers  of  illegally  staying  third-country 
nationals, OJ L 168, 30.6.2009, p. 24. 
OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p. 32. 
OJ L 335, 20.12.2007, p. 31. 
Regulation  (EC)  No  861/2007  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11  July  2007 
establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 1. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
obligations of Member States in the main directives (2005/29/EC28 and 97/7/EC29) to put in 
place  adequate  and  effective  means  of  redress.  Directives  on  the  liberalisation  of  the  EU’s 
electricity  and  gas  markets  (2009/72/EC30  and  2009/73/EC31)  also  deepen  consumer 
protection by calling for an energy ombudsman or a consumer body for out-of-court dispute 
settlements. Another example of how EU law supports enforcement is the creation of equality 
bodies  under  the  anti-discrimination  laws:  one  of  their  tasks  is  to  refer  victims  of 
discrimination to mediating organisations. 

Promoting  cooperation  between  the  national  competent  authorities  can  often  constitute  a 
useful  accompanying  measure.  This  can  be  done  through  networks  (e.g.  IMPEL  -  the  EU 
Network  for  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  environmental  law),  classical  advisory 
committees (e.g. the Committee of Senior Labour Inspectors) or innovative structures such as 
the  'Forum'  of  enforcement  authorities  linked  to  the  European  Chemicals  Agency  under  the 
REACH Regulation32. 

Informal  problem-solving  mechanisms  continued  to  deliver  fast  and  pragmatic  solutions  to 
citizens. SOLVIT, a network of national authorities supported by the Commission, treats an 
increasing  number  of  cases  year  by  year,  especially  in  the  sector  of  regulated  professions, 
residence  and  social  security.  In  2010,  9  out  of  10  SOLVIT  cases  could  be  resolved 
successfully,  mostly  within  a  10  weeks  deadline.  This  shows  an  increasing  success  rate 
compared to 2009.  

On  employment  matters,  the  Administrative  Commission  for  the  Coordination  of  Social 
Security Systems set up a Conciliation Board to mediate between Member States representing 
different opinions. 

Conclusion: The Commission will further reinforce and promote problem-solving instruments 
such  as  SOLVIT,  networks  such  as  IMPEL  and  will  continue  examining  whether  further 
mechanisms should be added to the current system of EU remedies in order to strengthen the 
enforcement  of  EU  law.  It  will  also  take  measures  to  enhance  synergies  between  existing 
problem-solving tools, where possible, so as to ensure that problems are resolved in the most 
effective manner, to the benefit of European citizens and businesses. 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair 
business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market, OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22. 
Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of 
consumers in respect of distance contracts, OJ L 144, 4.6.1997, p. 19. 
Directive  2009/72/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  13  July  2009  concerning 
common  rules  for  the  internal  market  in  electricity  and  repealing  Directive  2003/54/EC,  OJ  L  211, 
14.8.2009, p. 55. 
Directive  2009/73/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  13  July  2009  concerning 
common  rules  for  the  internal  market  in  natural  gas  and  repealing  Directive  2003/55/EC,  OJ  L  211, 
14.8.2009, p. 94. 
Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 
concerning  the  Registration,  Evaluation,  Authorisation  and  Restriction  of  Chemicals  (REACH), 
establishing  a  European  Chemicals  Agency,  amending  Directive  1999/45/EC  and  repealing  Council 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  793/93  and  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  1488/94  as  well  as  Council 
Directive  76/769/EEC  and  Commission  Directives  91/155/EEC,  93/67/EEC,  93/105/EC  and 
2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.4. 

Preventive Measures 

3.4.1.  Overall policy development 

Implementation  plans:  In  the  2007  Communication  the  Commission  undertook  to  design 
systematically  preventive  measures  aimed  at  assisting  Member  States  in  implementing  EU 
law.  Implementation  plans  play  a  significant  role  in  this  context.  In  them,  the  Commission 
identifies all main risks for the timely and correct implementation of a new directive and the 
appropriate actions to counter those risks. Developing implementation plans is an integral part 
of  the  Commission’s  smart  regulation  approach  and  helps  ensure  that  implementation  is 
adequately taken into  account  throughout the policy cycle. In 2010 the  Commission's  Work 
Programme 2011 identified a set of major and complex proposals for which implementation 
plans would be prepared.  

On 22 and 23 November 2010, the Belgian Presidency held a conference on the transposition 
of EU directives. The conference followed up on a similar conference organised by the Czech 
Presidency in March 2009 and was aimed at sharing best practices in the implementation of 
EU law33. 

Legal training: The Lisbon Treaty for the first time provides a legal basis for European Union 
action  on  European  judicial  training  (Articles  81(2)  and  82(1)  TFEU).  European  judicial 
training  should  encompass  the  training  of  legal  practitioners  (judges,  prosecutors,  lawyers, 
solicitors,  notaries,  bailiffs  and  court  staff)  in  all  areas  of  EU  legislation  through  training 
is  preparing  a 
activities  and  exchange  programmes.  The  European  Commission 
Communication  on  European  judicial  training  to  explore  how  to  meet  the  considerable 
training needs of legal practitioners in the field. In October 2010, the Commission launched a 
wide  consultation  to  collect  the  views  of  the  major  stakeholders  in  judicial  training.  The 
results of the consultation will be included in the Communication planned for the second half 
of 2011. 

3.4.2.  Main sector-specific developments 

Implementation plans: In  some  policy  areas,  directives  are 
regularly  coupled  with 
implementation  plans.  In  the  field  of  environment,  where  such  plans  have  been  drawn  up 
since  2008,  the  Commission  reviewed  its  approach  in  order  to  better  identify  risks  and 
harmonise with other preventive tools, such as scoreboards and transposition checklists34. On 
internal  market,  implementation  plans  have  been  applied  for  the  Defence  Procurement 
Directive,  the  3rd  Postal  Directive  and  for  directives  in  the  Company  Law  sector.  The 
Commission  now  generally  requires  an  implementation  plan  to  be  prepared  for  each  new 
proposal  for  a  directive  on  health  and  consumer  protection.  In  the  field  of  enterprise  and 
industry, several proposals for directives will be accompanied by implementation plans. These 
proposals include: the re-registration of used vehicles in another Member State, the pricing of 
medicinal products and modifications to the type approval of motor vehicles.  

33 

34 

See press release of 22.11.2010 at http://www.eutrio.be/pressrelease/opening-conference-transposition-
european-directives-olivier-chastel-describes-belgian-  
A  transposition  checklist  is  an  informal  document,  which  is  prepared  by  the  Commission  services 
following their discussions with the Member State concerned in working groups/package meetings, and 
which is aimed at helping Member States to implement EU law. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Other tools: Almost all Commission departments issue guidelines, handbooks or interpretative 
notes to make the transposition process smoother. Every Commission department endeavours 
to clarify unresolved transposition issues with Member States through expert group meetings 
and  bilateral  contacts.  Transposition  issues  are  frequently  put  on  the  agenda  of  package 
meetings.  Seminars,  workshops  and  working  papers  are  also  tools  which  are  regularly  used 
for improving transposition results.  

The  Commission  supports  Member  States  actively  to  make  the  transposition  process  as 
operational and swift as possible with the ultimate goal that EU law is applied correctly and 
rights and obligations are effectively enforced. As an example, the Green Paper on the future 
of  VAT35  seeks  to  identify  ways  to  simplify  the  EU  VAT  system  to  make  its  transposition 
easier. The Commission also plays an active role in improving the local Schengen cooperation 
amongst  Member  States'  consulates,  including  through  training  events,  and  harmonise  their 
practices in line with the EU acquis. 

Preventive  measures  will  also  focus  on  citizens'  involvement  in  the  application  of  EU  law. 
One  possible  aid  is  the  online  legal  database  of  consumer  law  (especially  Directive 
2005/29/EC36). Awareness-raising is a key priority in areas where citizens have to rely mostly 
on  Treaty  provisions  to  claim  their  rights  e.g.  free  movement  of  students,  recognition  of 
academic diplomas, and sports.  

Conclusion:  To  pre-empt  transposition  and  application  problems  with  new  legislation,  the 
Commission  will  continue  to  use  a  range  of  preventive  measures,  including  implementation 
plans, to support ultimately the smooth and accurate implementation of the future directives.  

3.5. 

Correlation tables 

Correlation tables are used to show how Member States have transposed EU law into national 
law by presenting how each element of EU law has been transposed.  

They  provide  a  clear  overview  of  which  national  rules  implement  each  of  the  articles  in  a 
directive  and  thus  facilitate  contacts  with  the  Commission  in  demonstrating  that  a  directive 
has  been  fully  transposed.  Later  on,  they  can  be  an  entry  point  for  operators  in  identifying 
relevant legal provisions.  

Since  2003  the  Commission  has  included  binding  provisions  on  correlation  tables  in  its 
proposals  for  directives.  However,  during  the  legislative  process  these  provisions  are  very 
often deleted at the initiative of the Council.  

In the Framework Agreement governing the relations between the European Parliament and 
the Commission since November 2010, both institutions have highlighted the broad range of 
benefits of the correlation tables and accordingly reaffirmed their commitment to this method. 
Under  Section  44  of  the  Agreement,  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Commission  stressed 
their  commitment  to  preserve  mandatory  provisions  on  correlation  tables  throughout  the 
legislative negotiations.  

35 

36 

Green paper of 1.12.2010 on the future of VAT Towards a simpler, more robust and efficient VAT 
system, COM(2010)695 final. 
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair 
business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market, OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Conclusion: The Commission considers that in many cases correlation tables are important 
instruments  which  help  it  to  ensure  the  effective  implementation  of  directives.  The 
Commission  will  therefore  include  appropriate  wording  in  its  proposals.  It  is  committed  to 
working  with  Council  and  European  Parliament  to  find  a  solution  which  enhances 
transposition and compliance.  

3.6. 

Transparency 

In  2010  the  Commission  continued  to  publish  on  its  website37  summary  information  on  all 
infringement proceedings from the stage of reasoned opinion and in selected cases, from the 
stage  of  letter  of  formal  notice.  The  summary  included  the  Member  State  concerned,  the 
responsible  Commission  service,  the  registration  number  and  the  title  of  the  proceedings  as 
well as the date and nature of the Commission’s last decision.  

Transparency was also among the aspect underlined in the revised Framework Agreement on 
the  relations  between  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Commission.  Under  Section  44  the 
Framework Agreement stipulates: 

'In  addition  to  specific  reports  and  the  annual  report  on  the  application  of  Union  law,  the 
Commission  shall  make  available  to  Parliament  summary  information  concerning  all 
infringement  procedures  from  the  letter  of  formal  notice,  included,  if  so  requested  by 
Parliament,  on  a  case-by-case  basis  and  respecting  the  confidentiality  rules,  in  particular 
those acknowledged by the Court of Justice of the European Union, on the issues to which the 
infringement procedure relates'. 

Conclusion:  The  Commission  will  further  promote  transparency  on  its  infringement  policy 
within the legal and judicial limits. 

4. 

SMART REGULATION 

In its Communication on Smart Regulation in the European Union38, the Commission set out 
its approach for integrating the application of EU law into the policy cycle (i.e. from an early 
stage  of  preparation  until  its  possible  revision).  The  objective  is  both  to  improve  the 
implementation  and  enforcement  of  existing  legislation  and  to  enhance  the  quality  of  new 
legislation.  This  approach  will  be  further  developed  and  should  contribute  to  the  effective 
monitoring and application of EU law. 

5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The year 2010 was characterised by activities aimed at implementing and further developing 
the  reform  of  the  Commission's  infringement  management  as  initiated  in  2007  with  the 
Communication 'A Europe of Results – Applying Community law'. 

37 
38 

EN 

http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/infringements/infringements_decisions_en.htm 
Communication of the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  Smart  Regulation  in  the  European  Union, 
COM 
information: 
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/better_regulation/key_docs_en.htm  

the  Better  Regulation  website 

2010/0543/final.  See 

for  more 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  2011  the  Commission  will  continue  to  focus  on  key  areas  of  this  strategic  approach,  in 
particular on: 

Effective problem-solving: e.g. broadening the use of EU Pilot with a view to including all 
Member States;  

Efficient management: improving management of infringement-related cases in line with the 
Commission's benchmarks; 

Preventive  measures:  e.g.  ensuring  a  systematic  and  coherent  approach  to  implementation 
plans; 

Smart  Regulation: integrating the monitoring of the  application of EU law more  fully into 
the wider legislative life cycle. 

EN 

15 

   EN