Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context
Date: 2018-05-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU regional policy, administrative cooperation, cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion, frontier region, legal cooperation, regional cooperation, regional development, regional disparity

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 29.5.2018 COM(2018) 373 final 2018/0198 (COD)  Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context {SEC(2018) 268 final} - {SWD(2018) 282 final} - {SWD(2018) 283 final}  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

One  of  the  main  objectives  of  the  Union  is  the  promotion  of  its  overall  harmonious 
development.  The  Union  shall  therefore  develop  and  pursue  its  actions  leading  to  the 
strengthening  of  its  economic,  social  and  territorial  cohesion.  In  particular,  the  Union  shall 
aim at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the 
backwardness of the least favoured regions (Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of 
the European Union ('TFEU'), among which "particular attention shall be paid to (…) cross-
border  (…)  regions".  The  Union  and  its  immediate  neighbours  in  the  European  Free  Trade 
Association ('EFTA') currently have forty internal land borders. 

Since  1990,  Interreg1  funding  has  supported  cross-border  cooperation  programmes  in  EU 
border regions including those with EFTA countries. It has financed thousands of projects and 
initiatives that have helped improve European integration. The main achievements of Interreg 
programmes  include:  increased  trust,  greater  connectivity,  improved  environment,  better 
health and economic growth. The 2014-2020 legal framework allowed the European Regional 
Development  Fund  ('ERDF')  under  Interreg  programmes  to  support  projects  "enhancing 
institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and efficient public administration 
by  promoting  legal  and  administrative  cooperation  and  cooperation  between  citizens  and 
institutions"2.  Since  it  was  set  up  Interreg  has  also  supported  the  completion  of  the  internal 
market3.  In  recent  decades,  the  European  integration  process  has  helped  internal  border 
regions  to  transform  themselves  from  mainly  peripheral  areas  into  areas  of  growth  and 
opportunities. The completion of the Single Market in 1992 has boosted EU productivity and 
reduced  costs  through  the  abolition  of  customs  formalities,  harmonisation  or  mutual 
recognition of technical rules and lower prices as a result of competition; intra EU trade has 
increased by 15% over 10 years; additional growth has been generated and around 2.5 million 
more jobs have been created. 

However, in a "Cross-border review"4, lasting more than two years, the Commission gathered 
evidence  that  border  regions  generally  perform  less  well  economically  than  other  regions 
within  a  Member  State.  Access  to  public  services  such  as  hospitals  and  universities5  is 
generally  lower  in  border  regions.  Navigating  between  different  administrative  and  legal 

1 

2 

3 

4 
5 

Interreg, also known as European Territorial Cooperation ('ETC'), is one of the two goals of cohesion 
policy and provides a framework for the implementation of joint actions and policy exchanges between 
national, regional and local actors from different Member States. The overarching objective of ETC is 
to promote a harmonious economic, social and territorial development of the Union as a whole. Interreg 
is  built  around  three  strands  of  cooperation:  cross-border  (Interreg  A),  transnational  (Interreg  B)  and 
interregional (Interreg C). Five programming periods of Interreg have succeeded each other: Interreg I 
(1990-1993), Interreg II (1994-1999), Interreg III (2000-2006), Interreg IV (2007-2013) and Interreg V 
(2014-2020). 
Point (a)(iv) of Article 7(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  17  December  2013  on  specific  provisions  for  the  support  from  the  European  Regional 
Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation goal (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 259). 
Points  3  and  13  of  the  Notice  C(90) 1562/3  to  the  Member  States,  laying  down  guidelines  for 
operational  programmes  which  Member  States  are  invited  to  establish  in  the  framework  of  a 
Community initiative concerning border areas (Interreg) (OJ C 215, 30.8.1990, p. 4). 
See: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/cooperation/european-territorial/cross-border/review/ . 
'Territories  with  specific  geographical  features',  European  Commission,  DG  REGIO  (2009),  Working 
Paper 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/working-
papers/2009/territories-with-specific-geographical-features . 

02/2009: 

No: 

EN 

0 

  EN 

 
                                                 
systems is often still complex and costly. Individuals, businesses, public authorities and non-
governmental  organisations  have  shared  with  the  Commission  their  at  times  negative 
experiences of interaction across internal borders. As a consequence the Commission adopted 
its  Communication  'Boosting  growth  and  cohesion  in  EU  border  regions'6  ('the  Border 
Regions  Communication').  It  highlights  ways  in  which  the  EU  and  its  Member  States  can 
reduce the complexity, length and costs of cross-border interaction and promote the pooling 
of services along internal borders. It looks at what needs to be improved to ensure that citizens 
and businesses in border regions can take full advantage of the opportunities offered on both 
sides  of  the  border.  The  Communication  proposes  a  10  points  action  plan;  one  point 
specifically addresses legal and administrative border obstacles7. 

It  is  therefore  reasonable  to  consider  that  legal  barriers  (especially  those  related  to  health 
services, labour regulation, taxes, business development), and barriers linked to differences in 
administrative cultures and national legal frameworks, are difficult for the programmes alone 
to  address  (as  they  required  decisions  beyond  programme  and  project  management 
structures). A number of effective mechanisms for cross-border  cooperation already exist at 
inter-governmental, regional and local level8. 

One specific action referred to in point nine of the Border Regions Communication refers to 
an initiative started under the Luxembourg Presidency in 2015: A number of Member States 
are considering the merit of a new instrument to simplify cross-border projects by making it 
possible, on a voluntary basis and agreed by the competent authorities in charge, for the rules 
of  one  Member  State  to  apply  in  the  neighbouring  Member  State.  This  would  apply  to  a 
specific project or action limited in time, located within a border region and initiated by local 
and/or regional public authorities9. The Commission hase closely followed this work, agrees 
with the concept and is therefore proposing a voluntary mechanism to resolve legal obstacles 
in border regions. 

For the details of this proposal see Section 5 below. 

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions 

Interreg  as  the  main  funding  instrument  of  Cohesion  Policy,  supports  cross-border 
cooperation  programmes  in  EU  border  regions,  including  those  with  bordering  EFTA 
countries.  However,  as  set  out  in  the  Border  Regions  Communication,  border  regions 
generally perform less well economically than other regions within a Member State. Measures 
that go beyond European funding but which complement further EU funding in border regions 
are therefore needed as these ongoing difficulties cannot be addressed through financing and 
investments such as Interreg alone. 

A mechanism to resolve legal obstacles in border regions is therefore a necessary complement 
both to the financial support under Interreg, but also to institutional support such as European 

6 

7 

8 
9 

Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  'Boosting  growth 
and cohesion in EU border regions' - COM(2017) 534 final, 20.9.2017. 
A border obstacle within the context of this Communication is not only a restriction on free movement 
as established by the European Court of Justice, but a law, rule or administrative practice that obstructs 
the inherent potential of a border region when interacting across the border. 
For details see SWD(2017) 307 final, point 3.1, p. 24, 25, 32, 36 and 48. 
Input  paper  for  the  Informal  Ministerial  Meeting  on  Territorial  Cohesion  under  the  Luxembourg 
Presidency,  see:  http://www.amenagement-territoire.public.lu/fr/eu-presidency/Informal-Ministerial-
Meetings-on-Territorial-Cohesion-and-Urban-Policy-_26-27-November-2015_-Luxembourg-
City_.html# ; see also SWD(2017) 307 final, point 3.9, p. 49-50. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
                                                 
groupings of territorial cooperation10, as those groupings are not given legislative powers to 
overcome legal obstacles11. 

• 

Consistency with other Union policies 

As set out above, Cohesion Policy and the Single Market support each other. The mechanism 
to  be  established  under  this  Regulation  would  contribute  to  the  objectives  of  the  Border 
Regions  Communication  and  boosting  the  potential  of  border  regions,  which  is  partially 
untapped because of differing legal systems. A recent study contracted by the Commission12 
on the economic impact of border obstacles on GDP and employment levels in internal land 
border  regions  estimates  that,  even  if  only  20%  of  the  existing  obstacles  were  removed, 
border regions would increase their GDP by 2%.  A mechanism to resolve legal obstacles in 
border  regions  is  therefore  also  a  necessary  complement  to  the  functioning  of  the  internal 
market, a core objective of the Union (Article 3 TEU and Article 3(1)(b) TFEU)13. 

The provisions in this proposal on legal protection of persons resident in a cross-border region 
who  consider  themselves  wronged  by  acts  or  omissions  arising  from  the  authorities' 
application  of  the  mechanism  predominantly  concern  administrative/public  law  and  do  not 
affect  existing  EU  law on  the  resolution  of  conflict  of law14,  because that  EU  law  concerns 
civil law only. This Regulation is without prejudice to such law (such EU law may apply to 
disputes about contractual or non-contractual matters). 

2. 

• 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The third subparagraph of Article 175 TFEU provides for specific actions to be decided upon 
outside  the  Funds  listed  in  the  first  subparagraph  of  that  Article,  in  order  to  achieve  the 
objective  of  social  and  economic  cohesion  envisaged  by  the  TFEU.  The  harmonious 
development  of  the  entire  Community  territory  and  greater  economic,  social  and  territorial 
cohesion entail more intensive territorial cooperation. To this end it is appropriate to take the 
measures to improve implementing conditions for territorial cooperation actions. 

10 

11 
12 

13 

14 

Regulation  (EC)  No 1082/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5  July  2006  on  a 
European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19). 
See the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006. 
Politecnico di Milano (2017) 'Quantification of the effects of legal and administrative border obstacles 
in  land  border  regions';  see  COM(2017) 534  final,  p.  6;  for  more  details  see  its  accompanying 
SWD(2017) 307 final, point 2.2, p. 20-22. 
See  also  the  9th  consideration  of  the  preamble  TEU  (bold  added):  "DETERMINED  to  promote 
economic  and  social  progress  for  their  peoples,  taking  into  account  the  principle  of  sustainable 
development and within the context of the accomplishment of the internal market and of reinforced 
cohesion and environmental protection, and to implement policies ensuring that advances in economic 
integration are accompanied by parallel progress in other fields,…". 
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on 
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 
351, 20.12.2012, p. 1) ('Brussels I Recast'),  
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 2201/2003  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental 
responsibility,  repealing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000  (OJ  L  338,  23.12.2003,  p.  1)  ('Brussels  II'), 
Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the 
law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), (OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6), and  
Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the 
law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) (OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 40). 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
                                                 
 
• 

Subsidiarity 

The  conditions  for  territorial  cooperation  should  be  created  in  accordance  with  the 
subsidiarity principle enshrined in Article 5(3) of the Treaty on the European Union ('TEU'). 
Member  States  have  undertaken  individual,  bilateral  and  even  multilateral  initiatives  to 
resolve legal border obstacles. However, those mechanisms do not exist in all Member States, 
or  not  for  all  borders  of  a  given  Member  State.  The  financing  (mainly  Interreg)  and  legal 
instruments (mainly EGTCs) provided at EU level so far have not been sufficient to resolve 
legal  border  obstacles  throughout  the  EU.  The  objectives  of  the  proposed  action  can 
consequently not be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at 
regional  and  local  level,  but  can  rather,  by  reason  of  the  scale  or  effects  of  the  proposed 
action, be better achieved at Union level. Further action by the Union legislator is therefore 
needed. 

Proportionality 

In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in Article 5(4) TEU, the content 
and form of EU action should not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the 
Treaties.  Recourse  to  the  specific  mechanism  set  up  under  this  Regulation  is  voluntary.  A 
Member  State  may  decide,  on  a  specific  border  with  one  or  more  neighbouring  Member 
States,  to  continue  to  resolve  legal  obstacles  in  a  specific  cross-border  region  under  the 
effective  mechanisms  it  has  set  up  at  national  level  or  which  it  has  set  up  formally  or 
informally, together with one or more neighbouring Member States. In that case, it may opt 
not to use the mechanism set up under this Regulation. Likewise, a Member State may decide, 
on  a  specific  border  with  one  or  more  neighbouring  Member  States,  to  join  an  existing 
effective  mechanism  set  up  formally  or  informally  by  one  or  more  neighbouring  Member 
States. If that mechanism allows it to join, again, it may opt not to use the mechanism set up 
under  this  Regulation.  This  Regulation  does  therefore  not  go  beyond  what  is  necessary  in 
order to achieve its objectives for those cross-border regions, for which Member States have 
no efficient mechanisms in place for resolving legal obstacles. 

• 

Choice of the instrument 

As set out in Section 1 above, Member States have undertaken individual, bilateral and even 
multilateral initiatives to resolve legal border obstacles. 

A  Regulation  establishes  obligations  on  Member  States  to  set  up,  per  border  with  a 
neighbouring  Member  State,  a  mechanism  to  resolve  legal  obstacles  in  a  joint  cross-border 
region, while allowing them to implement other effective mechanisms.  

A recommendation would not be the most effective instrument, because recommendations do 
not have binding force (see the fifth paragraph of Article 288 TFEU). 

A Directive would also not be the most effective instrument, as it is binding, as to the result to 
be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but leaves the choice of form 
and methods to the national authorities (see the third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU). As set 
out  in  Section  3.2  of  the  Border  Regions  Communication,  the  transposition  of  an  EU 
Directive  in  two  neighbouring  Member  States  may  create  two  different  systems  which  then 
meet  along  internal  borders.  This  may  create  complexity  -  and  sometimes  even  legal 
uncertainty  -  and  inflate  costs15.  This  proposal  is  precisely  for  a  mechanism  to  establish  a 

15 

E.g.  Directive  2014/24/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  26  February  2014  on 
public  procurement  contains  19  instances  where  minimum  standards  apply,  for  example  on  setting 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
method  at  EU  level  because  only  few  Member  States  have  set  up  a  different  method.  A 
Directive could therefore create new divergences in border regions. 

3. 

RESULTS  OF  RETROSPECTIVE  EVALUATIONS,  STAKEHOLDERS 
IMPACT  ASSESSMENTS,  FUNDAMENTAL 
CONSULTATIONS  AND 
RIGHTS 

• 

Retrospective evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation 

N/A: new legislation 

• 

Stakeholder consultations 

The  concept  for  a  cross-border  policy  stems  initially  from  work  undertaken  by  the 
Luxembourg Presidency of the Council in 2015, which led to the establishment of an informal 
working  group  of  Member  States  that  has  met  regularly  since.  The  informal  working  group 
has explored options to facilitate the resolution of persisting border obstacles, especially when 
implementing  cross-border  projects.  The  notion  of  applying  the  rules  (laws,  regulations, 
standards) of one Member Sate across the border in the neighbouring Member State has been 
formulated by that group. The group normally gathers between 10 and 15 Member States at 
its  meetings.  Groupings  of  Member  States  have  also  been  active,  in  particular  the  Benelux 
Union and the Nordic Council of Ministers. 

Other stakeholders, in particular border regions and institutions, have been asking for such an 
instrument  for  quite  some  time.  This  has  been  particularly  visible  during  the  Cross-Border 
Review  undertaken  by  DG  REGIO  between  2015  and  2017.  During  that  Review,  a  public 
consultation in all the official languages of the EU took place and received over 620 replies. 
To  the  question  linked  to  potential  solution  to  border  issues,  several  respondents  explicitly 
asked  for  the  Commission  to  seek  to  promote  more  flexibility  in  the  implementation  of 
national/regional  legislation  in  border  regions.  The  idea  of  "freeing"  a  border  region  from 
national legislation or adapting it to border conditions was suggested several times. 

Finally, the draft opinions of the Committee of the Regions and of the European Parliament in 
response  to  the  Communication  "Boosting  Growth  and  Cohesion  in  EU  Border  Regions" 
specifically  welcome  the  proposal  to  develop  such  an  instrument.  Both  opinions  will  be 
adopted in the summer 2018. 

• 

Impact assessment 

The impact and European added value of Interreg programmes are well recognised. However, 
in  many  cases  cross-border  barriers  (especially  in  relation  to  health  services,  labour 
regulation,  local  public  transport  and  business  development)  stem  from  differences  in 
administrative practices and national legal frameworks. These are difficult for programmes to 
address alone, requiring decisions beyond programme structures. 

To tackle this, in 2015 the Luxembourg Presidency and several Member States explored the 
use of one Member State's rules in a neighbouring Member State. The Commission proposes 
to facilitate such solutions with an "off-the-shelf" legal instrument. 

specific time limits. This creates 19 potential occasions where cross-border public procurement can be 
particularly difficult, as certain Member States will apply longer deadlines than others. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
There are two options: a European Cross-Border Commitment ("Commitment") (which itself 
enables  derogation from normal rules) or  a European Cross-Border Statement ("Statement") 
(signatories undertake formally to legislate to amend normal rules ). The mechanism will: 

• 

• 

• 

remain voluntary: Member States may opt for the mechanism or use other effective 
mechanisms to resolve legal border barriers; 

focus  on  intra-EU  land  borders,  while  allowing  Member  States  to  also  apply  the 
mechanism to maritime and external borders; 

cover  joint  projects  for  any  item  of  infrastructure  with  impact  in  a  cross-border 
region or any service of general economic interest provided in a cross-border region. 

If  20%  of  existing  legal  and  administrative  obstacles  found  along  internal  borders  were 
addressed, border regions would increase their GDP by 2%. The Commitment contributes to 
this  by  providing  a  cost-free  legal  framework  to  reduce  the  costs  and  run-in  time  of  certain 
cross-border projects. 

The framework would help resolve certain expensive complexities when implementing cross-
border  projects.    It  is  not,  however,  "one-size-fits-all"  but  rather  gives  Member  States  the 
option of devising solutions that best suit the regional context. 

• 

Simplification 

N/A: new legislation 

• 

Fundamental rights 

Under  Article  6  of  the  Treaty  on  the  European  Union,  the  Union  recognises  the  rights, 
freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 
which has the same legal value as the Treaties. Moreover, fundamental rights, as guaranteed 
by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 
and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, constitute 
general principles of the EU law. 

This proposal concerns a legal mechanism to resolve legal border obstacles and is, therefore, 
mainly  addressed  to  authorities  in  the  Member  States.  People  should  benefit  from  the 
solutions  agreed.  Resolving  legal  border  obstacles  under  this  proposal  should  help  people 
living in border regions to enjoy their fundamental rights. In particular, this refers to the right 
to  protection  of  personal  data  (Article  8),  to  the  right  to  education  including  access  to 
vocational and continuing training (Article 14), the freedom to choose an occupation and the 
right  to  engage  in  work  (Article  15),  especially  freedom  to  seek  employment,  to  work,  to 
exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State; freedom to 
conduct  a  business  (Article  16);  access  to  social  security  and  social  assistance  (Article  34); 
access to health care (Article 35); and access to services of general economic interest (Article 
36). 

The proposal therefore also covers the issue of effective legal protection of people in border 
regions. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

The present proposal is not expected to have immediate budgetary implications, in so far as it 
is to set up a mechanism and not a financial instrument. 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
The involvement of the Border Focal Point ('BFP') set up within the Commission also has no 
immediate budgetary implications, in so far as it has already been set up and assigned its own 
staff. 

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementing plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

Like any EU Regulation the proposed Regulation will be binding in its entirety and directly 
applicable  in  all  Member  States.  Article  291(1)  TFEU  requires  Member  States  to  adopt  all 
measures  of  national  law  necessary  to  implement  legally  binding  Union  acts.  As  set  out  in 
Section 3.2 of the Border Regions Communication, even where there is European legislation , 
Member States have a degree of flexibility and discretion in the way they apply the legislation 
in  their  national  systems  and  in  the  detailed  rules  for  implementing  EU  Regulations.  As  a 
result, when two different systems meet along internal borders, this may create complexity - 
and  sometimes  even  legal  uncertainty  -  and  inflate  costs.  Consequently,  uniform  conditions 
for  implementing  legally  binding  Union  acts  are  needed.  As  allowed  under  Article  291(2) 
TFEU, the proposed Regulation may confer implementing powers on the Commission. Like 
the  method  for  controlling  the  implementation  of  other  legal  instruments  at  EU  level16,  this 
proposal limits itself to requiring Member States to communicate their national implementing 
rules to the Commission, thus enabling the Commission to assess whether those national rules 
implement this Regulation effectively. 

To assess whether the mechanism  established under the proposed Regulation has proven an 
additional effective tool to resolve legal obstacles in border regions, the Commission should, 
in  line  with  the  Better  Regulation  Agenda17,  evaluate  existing  legislation.  It  is  therefore 
proposed, as for the EGTC, that the Commission forward a report to the European Parliament, 
the Council and the Committee of the Regions on the application of the proposed Regulation, 
using indicators to evaluate its effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, European added value and 
scope for simplification within 5 years of application of the proposed Regulation. 

• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

Chapter 1 - General provisions (Articles 1 to 7) 

Title 1 sets out the subject matter and scope of the Regulation, definitions and clarifications, 
the Member States' choice of whether to use  the mechanism established under this proposal, 
the  national  and  regional  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  in  the  Member  States  and  a 
coordination point at EU level. 

The subject matter (Article 1) is a mechanism to apply, for a common cross-border region, in 
a given Member State, the legal provisions from the neighbouring Member State if applying 
its own laws would present a legal obstacle to implementing a joint project (which might be 
an item of infrastructure or any service of general economic interest). 

16 

17 

See the third subparagraph of Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1082/2006: "The Member State shall 
submit  to  the  Commission  any  provisions  adopted  under  this  Article,  as  well  as  any  amendments 
thereof." 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  European  Council  and  the 
Council  'Better  Regulation:  Delivering  better  results  for  a  stronger  Union'  -  COM(2016) 615  final, 
14.9.2016. 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
                                                 
The  Mechanism  consists 
in  concluding  a  European  Cross-border  Commitment 
(Commitment'), which is self-executing, or a European Cross-border Statement ('Statement') 
which requires a further legislative procedure in the Member State. 

The  scope  of  the  proposed  Regulation  (Article  2)  covers  common-border  regions  on  land 
borders. Based on the evidence gathered under the Cross-border Review and as set out in the 
Border  Regions  Communication  ,  legal  obstacles  are  predominantly  presented  to  people 
interacting  on  land  borders,  because  people  cross  borders  on  a  daily  or  weekly  basis  for 
working, learning, shopping or using facilities and services of general economic interest, or a 
combination of these. 

Article 3 lists definitions needed to implement the proposed Regulation together with some 
clarifications,  in  particular  with  regard  to  Member  States  which  cover  several  territorial 
entities  with  legislative  powers,  in  order  to  guarantee  that  all  relevant  levels  of  a  given 
Member State can, where relevant, amend legal obstacles under its competence. 

To  respect  the  principle  of  subsidiarity,  Member  States  may  opt  for  the  Mechanism 
established under the proposed Regulation or continue to use other effective mechanisms to 
resolve  legal  obstacles,  or,  for  certain  borders,  join  other  effective  mechanisms  (Article  4). 
Most  Member  States  will  probably  need  to  adopt  legislation  first  to  enable  competent 
authorities  to  conclude  a  Commitment,  which  by  force  of  its  conclusion  would  allow  the 
Member State to "pull over the border" legal provisions from the neighbouring Member State 
thus derogating from its "normally" applicable national rules. Some Member States may just 
allow its competent authorities to sign up to a Statement, committing it to legislate to derogate 
from the "normally" applicable national rules by means of a formal legislative act. In case of 
the  self-executing  Commitment  the  "normally"  applicable  national  rules  remain,  but  the 
Commitment  creates  a  derogation.  In  case  of  the  Statement,  the  "normally"  applicable 
national rules will be formally amended to allow for an explicit derogation. 

Member States opting for the Mechanism set up under the proposed Regulation are obliged to 
establish a national or, in the case of federal states, regional Cross-border Coordination Points 
(Article 5).  Finally,  Article  6  lists  the  tasks  of  the  coordination  point  at  EU  level,  as 
announced  in  the  Border  Regions  Communication  and  already  set  up  in  the  Commission's 
Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy. In order to ensure uniform conditions for 
the  implementation  of  this  Regulation,  Article  7  confers  implementing  powers  on  the 
Commission  in  accordance  with  Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European  Parliament 
and of the Council 18 for setting up a database and rules for maintaining it, for the protection 
of data and for the model to be used when information on the implementation and use of the 
Mechanism  is  submitted  by  Cross-border  Coordination  Points.  The  database  must  comply 
with  the  provisions  on  the  protection  of  data  under  Regulation  (EC)  No 45/2001  of  the 
European Parliament and of the Council19. 

18 

19 

Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  February  2011 
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of 
the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13). 
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on 
the  protection  of  individuals  with  regard  to  the  processing  of  personal  data  by  the  Community 
institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1). 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
                                                 
Chapter 2 - Procedure for concluding a Commitment or Statement (Articles 8 to 17) 

The  procedure  for  concluding  a  Commitment  or  Statement  consists  in  the  preparation  and 
submission  of  the  initiative  document  (Articles  8  and  9),  to  be  drafted  by  the  "initiator",  a 
preliminary  analysis  by  the  Member  State  which  is  requested  to  "pull  over  the  border"  the 
legal provisions of the neighbouring Member State (Articles 10 and 11), the drafting of the 
Commitment or Statement to be concluded (Articles 12 to 15) and finally the conclusion of 
the Commitment or  Statement and its signing by the competent authorities of both Member 
States (Articles 16 and 17). 

More  specifically  Article  8  establishes  who  can  be  an  "initiator":  (a)  the  public  or  private 
body  responsible  for  initiating  or  both  initiating  and  implementing  a  joint  project  (e.g.  the 
company  organising  public  transport  in  Strasbourg  planning  to  extend  a  tramline  over  the 
border to the German town of Kehl); or (b) one or more local or regional authority located in 
a  given  cross-border  region  or  exercising  public  power  in  that  cross-border  region  (e.g.  the 
city of Strasbourg or the intercommunal structure of Strasbourg Eurométropole or the city of 
Kehl);  or  (c)  a  body  with  or  without  legal  personality  set  up  for  cross-border  cooperation 
located  in  or  covering  at  least  partially  a  given  cross-border  region,  including  European 
groupings  of  territorial  cooperation  under  Regulation  (EC)  No  1082/2006  of  the  European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  Euroregions,  Euregios  and  similar  bodies  (e.g.  the  EGTC 
Eurodistrict  Strasbourg-Ortenau);  or  (d)  an  organisation  set  up  on  behalf  of  cross-border 
regions with the aim of promoting the interests of cross-border territories and of facilitating 
the networking of players and the sharing of experiences, such as the Association of European 
Border Regions, the Mission Opérationnelle Transfrontalière or the Central European Service 
for Cross-border Initiatives; or (e) several of the entities referred to in points (a) to (d) jointly. 

The  initiator  shall  prepare  an  initiative  document  covering  the  elements  listed  in  Article  9. 
The derogation from the "normally" applicable national law is limited to the strict minimum 
with regard to both the territory it covers and its duration. 

The key actors in the Member States requested to conclude a Commitment or Statement are 
the respective national or regional Cross-border Coordination Points which will liaise with all 
the  competent  authorities  in  the  Member  State  and  with  their  counterpart(s)  in  the 
neighbouring  Member  State  (Articles  10  and  11).  By  a  certain  deadline,  the  Cross-border 
Coordination  Point  must  react  and  decide  whether  to  launch  a  procedure  leading  to  the 
conclusion of a  Commitment or  Statement, whether the legal obstacle is "real" and whether 
for  one  or  more  legal  obstacles  a  resolution  has  been  found  which  could  be  applied.  The 
initiator may be asked to revise or add to its document (Article 12). 

Once  the  initiative  document  is  considered  complete,  the  Cross-border  Coordination  Point 
must  prepare  a  draft  Commitment  or  Statement  and,  again  by  a  certain  deadline,  reach  an 
agreement on the text with the other Member State (Articles 13 to 15) and finally conclude it 
(Articles 16 and 17). The signed Commitment or Statement must set out the elements listed 
in  Article  14(1).  The  signed  Commitment  or  Statement  must  be  transmitted  not  only  to  the 
initiator, but also to the Cross-border Coordination Point of the neighbouring Member State, 
the competent authority of its own Member State, the EU coordination point and the authority 
or  body  designated  by  the  committing  Member  State  for  official  publication  (Article 
17(2)(e)). 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
Chapter 3 - Implementation and monitoring of Commitments or Statements (Articles 18 
to 20) 

The  Commitment  is  implemented  by,  where  relevant,  amending  existing  administrative  acts 
based on the "normally" applicable law or adopting new administrative acts based on the law 
"pulled  over  the  border"  (Article  18).  Where  several  authorities  are  each  competent  for 
different  aspects  of  a  complex  legal  obstacle,  the  Commitment  must  be  accompanied  by  a 
timetable  for  each  of  them.  Respecting  the  principle  of  subsidiarity,  the  adoption  and 
transmission of those amended or new administrative acts must be governed by the national 
law on administrative procedures (Article 18(5)). 

The  Statement  must  be  implemented  by  one  or  more  submissions  of  proposals  to  the 
competent  legislative  body  in  order  to  amend  the  national  law  to  cover  the  necessary 
derogations (Article 19). 

In  both  cases,  once  all  steps  planned  are  implemented,  the  Cross-border  Coordination  Point 
must  inform  its  counterpart  in  the  other  Member  State  and  the  EU  coordination  point 
(Article 18(4) and (5) and Article 19(6) and (7)). 

Member  States  may  decide  that  the  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  may  remind  the 
competent  authority  to  comply  with  the  deadlines  and  the  timetables  referred  to  in  Articles 
14(3) and 18(1) and may inform the authority supervising the competent committing authority 
or  the competent member of government of  missed  deadlines or timetables fixed in a  given 
Commitment or Statement (Article 6(2)(e)). 

Member  States  should  decide  which  authorities  will  monitor  compliance  with  a  given 
Commitment and with the amended provisions adopted pursuant to a Statement (Article 20). 
Based on the adminisitrative acts the respect for the obligations and rights of the addressees 
thereof  should  be  monitored.  Member  States  should  be  allowed  to  decide  whether  that 
monitoring  is  entrusted  to  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State  which  transferred  its  legal 
provisions because those authorities are more familiar with those rules or is entrusted to the 
authorities of the Member State where those provisions are applied because those authorities 
are more familiar with the remaining legal system of the committing Member States and the 
law governing the addressees. 

Chapter 4 - Legal protection under Commitment and Statement (Articles 21 and 22) 

Based  on  experience  in  negotiating  the  EGTC  Regulation,  and  in  response  to  specific 
concerns of some Member States, it is appropriate to address the issue of legal protection of 
persons  resident  in  a  cross-border  region  who  consider  themselves  wronged  by  acts  or 
omissions  arising  from  the  authorities'  application,  under  a  Commitment  or  Statement,  of 
another Member State' legal provision (Article 21(1)). 

Both for Commitments and Statements, the law of the neighbouring Member State is applied 
in  the  committing  Member  State  as  incorporated  into  its  own  legislation  and  the  legal 
protection  should  therefore  fall  to  the  courts  of  the  committing  Member  States  even  where 
persons have their legal residence in the transferring Member State. The same should apply to 
legal redress against the Member State whose administrative act is challenged (Article 21(2)). 
For  example,  an  administrative  act  allowing  a  tram  to  operate  on  German  territory  under 
French law should only be challenged in German courts. 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
A different approach should apply to legal redress against the monitoring of the application of 
the  Commitment  and  Statement.  Where  an  authority  from  the  neighbouring  Member  State 
(e.g. France) has agreed to monitor the application of the amended law in Germany (by way 
of  integrating  French  provisions  and  derogating  from  "normally"  applicable  German 
provisions) and can act in respect of persons resident in the cross-border area in its own name, 
the  competent  courts  are  those  of  the  Member  State  where  those  persons  have  their  legal 
residence  (Article  22(1)).  So  if  a  French  authority  can  adopt  in  its  own  name  an 
administrative act addressed to the tram operator whose legal residence is in France (stating 
that the tram operator has not complied with French law on technical requirements for electric 
signals  on  German  territory),  then  French  courts  are  competent.  However,  where  the 
competent  transferring  authority  cannot  act  in  its  own  name,  but  only  in  the  name  of  the 
competent  committing  authority,  the  competent  courts  are  those  of  the  committing  Member 
State,  regardless  of  the  legal  residence  of  the  person  (Article  22(2)).  So  if  the  French 
authority monitors compliance with French law, but the administrative act is in the name of a 
German authority, then German courts are competent. 

Chapter 5 – Implementing and final provisions (Articles 23 to 26) 

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, in particular 
for  the  exchange  of  information  between  the  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  and  the 
Commission  through  a  database  set  up  end  maintained  by  the  Commission,  implementing 
powers  should  be conferred in accordance with the legislation on committee procedure. For 
practical  and  coordination  purposes,  that  will  be  the  ‘Coordination  Committee  for  the 
European Structural and Investment Funds’ (Article 23). 

The final provisions20 establish the Member States' obligation to make the national provisions 
needed  to  ensure  effective  application  of  the  proposed  Regulation  (Article  24(1))  and  to 
inform the Commission within a year of the entry into force of the proposed Regulation both 
of those national implementing rules and of the setting up of national or regional Cross-border 
Coordination Points (Article 24(2)). 

As those provisions will specify which border regions of a given Member State are covered 
by the Mechanism, the Commission will be in a position to assess whether the Member State 
has  opted  for  a  different  mechanism  for  borders  not  specified.  Member  States  should 
nevertheless  also  inform  explicitly  about  such  choice  under  Article  4,  but  without  deadline 
(Article 24(3)). 

Article 25 establishes an obligation of the Commission to forward a report on the application 
of the proposed Regulation within five years after its adoption. 

The application of the Regulation should be deferred by one year after its entry into force in 
order  to  grant  Member  States  a  year  to  adopt  its  national  implementation  provisions 
(Article 26). 

20 

Based  on  the  experience  with  the  corresponding  provisions  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 1082/2006 
(Articles 16 to 18). 

EN 

10 

  EN 

 
                                                 
2018/0198 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the 
third paragraph of Article 175 thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee21, 
Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions22, 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

The  third  paragraph  of  Article  175  of  the  Treaty  provides  for  specific  actions  to  be 
decided upon outside the Funds which are the subject of the first subparagraph of that 
Article, in order to achieve the objective of social and economic cohesion envisaged 
by the Treaty. The harmonious development of the entire Union territory and greater 
economic,  social  and  territorial  cohesion  imply  the  strengthening  of  territorial 
cooperation. To this end it is appropriate to adopt the measures necessary to improve 
the implementation conditions for actions of territorial cooperation. 

Article  174  of  the  Treaty  recognises  the  challenges  faced  by  border  regions  and 
provides  that  the  Union  should  pay  particular  attention  to  these  regions,  when 
developing and pursuing actions leading to the strengthening of the Union’s economic, 
social and territorial cohesion. Due to the increase in the number of land and maritime 
borders,  the  Union  and  its  immediate  neighbours  in  the  European  Free  Trade 
Association ('EFTA') have forty internal land borders. 
In  its  Communication  'Boosting  growth  and  cohesion  in  EU  border  regions'23  ('the 
Border Regions Communication') the Commission sets out that over the past decades, 
the European integration process has helped internal border regions to transform from 
mainly peripheral areas into areas of growth and opportunities. The completion of the 
Single Market in 1992 has boosted Union productivity and reduced costs through the 
abolition  of  customs  formalities,  harmonisation  or  mutual  recognition  of  technical 
rules and lower prices as a result of competition; intra-EU trade has increased by 15% 
over 10 years; additional growth has been generated and around 2.5 million more jobs 
have been created. 

21 
22 
23 

Not yet published in the Official Journal. 
Not yet published in the Official Journal. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  'Boosting  growth 
and cohesion in EU border regions' - COM(2017) 534 final, 20.9.2017. 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

24 

25 

The Border Regions Communication has also given evidence of the fact that there still 
exist  a  number  of  legal  barriers  in  border  regions,  especially  those  related  to  health 
services,  labour  regulation,  taxes,  business  development,  and  barriers  linked  to 
differences in administrative cultures and national legal frameworks. Neither European 
Territorial  Cooperation  funding  nor  the  institutional  support  to  cooperation  by  the 
European  groupings  of  territorial  cooperation  (EGTCs)  is  sufficient  alone  to  address 
the resolution of those barriers which constitute real obstacles to effective cooperation. 

Since  1990,  programmes  under  the  European  Territorial  Cooperation  goal,  better 
known  as  'Interreg'24  have  supported  cross-border  cooperation  programmes  along 
Union border regions, including those with EFTA countries. It has financed thousands 
of  projects  and  initiatives  that  have  helped  improve  European  integration.  The  main 
achievements  of  Interreg  programmes  include:  increased  trust,  higher  connectivity, 
improved  environment,  better  health  and  economic  growth.  From  people-to-people 
projects  via  infrastructure  investments  and  support  to  institutional  cooperation 
initiatives,  Interreg  has  made  a  genuine  difference  to  border  regions  and  has 
contributed to their transformation. Interreg has also supported cooperation on certain 
maritime borders. However, legal obstacles are much less an issue for maritime border 
regions because of the physical impossibility to cross the border daily or several times 
per week for work, education and training, shopping, the use of facilities and services 
of general economic interest or a combination or for rapid emergency interventions. 

Financial support by Interreg to cross-border cooperation has been complemented by 
the EGTCs, set up since 2006 under Regulation (EU) No 1082/2006 of the European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council25.  However,  pursuant  to  the  first  subparagraph  of 
Article  7(4)  of  Regulation  (EC) No 1082/2006,  EGTCs  cannot  exercise  regulatory 
powers to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in cross-border context. 

In  its  Border  Regions  Communication,  the  Commission  referred  among  other 
measures to an initiative started under the Luxembourg Presidency in 2015: A number 
of  Member  States  are  considering  the  merits  of  a  new  instrument  to  simplify  cross-
border  projects  by  making  it  possible,  on  a  voluntary  basis  and  agreed  by  the 
competent  authorities  in  charge,  for  the  rules  of  one  Member  State  to  apply  in  the 
neighbouring  Member  State.  This  would  apply  to  an  individual  project  or  action 
limited  in  time,  located  within  a  border  region  and  initiated  by  local  or  regional 
authorities.  

Even though a number of effective mechanisms for cross-border cooperation already 
exist  at  inter-governmental,  regional  and  local  level  in  certain  regions  of  the  Union, 
they do not cover all border regions in the Union. In order to complement the existing 
systems, it is therefore necessary to set up a voluntary mechanism to resolve legal and 
administrative obstacles in all border regions ('the Mechanism'). 

In full respect of the constitutional and institutional set-up of the Member States, the 
use  of  the  Mechanism  should  be  voluntary  with  regard  to  those  border  regions  of  a 
given Member State where another effective mechanism exists or could be set up with 
the neighbouring Member State. It should consist of two measures: the signature and 

Five  programming  periods  of  Interreg  have  succeeded  each  other:  INTERREG I  (1990-1993), 
INTERREG II 
(2007-2013)  and 
INTERREG V (2014-2020). 
Regulation  (EC)  No 1082/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5  July  2006  on  a 
European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19). 

INTERREG IV 

INTERREG III 

(2000-2006), 

(1994-1999), 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
                                                 
the  conclusion  of  a  European  Cross-Border  Commitment  (the  'Commitment')  or  the 
signature of a European Cross-Border Statement (the 'Statement'). 

(10)  The Commitment should be self-executing, meaning that pursuant to the conclusion of 
the Commitment certain legal provisions of one Member State are to be applied on the 
territory  of  the  neighbouring  Member  State.  It  should  also  be  acceptable  that  the 
Member  States  are  to  adopt  a  legislative  act  to  allow  for  the  conclusion  of  a 
Commitment, in order to prevent national legislation formally adopted by a legislative 
body from being derogated from by an authority other than that legislative body and in 
breach of legal clarity and transparency or both.  

(11)  The  Statement  would  still  require  a  legislative  procedure  in  the  Member  State.  The 
authority concluding the Statement should make a formal statement that it will trigger 
by  a  certain  deadline  the  legislative  procedure  necessary  to  amend  the  normally 
applicable  national  law  and  to  apply,  by  way  of  an  explicit  derogation,  the  law  of  a 
neighbouring Member State. 

(12)  Legal obstacles are predominantly felt by persons interacting on land borders, because 
people cross borders on a daily or weekly basis. In order to concentrate the effect of 
this  Regulation  to  the  regions  closest  to  the  border  and  with  the  highest  degree  of 
integration  and  interaction  between  neighbouring  Member  States,  this  Regulation 
should  apply  to  cross-border  regions  within  the  meaning  of  the  territory  covered  by 
neighbouring  land  border  regions  in  two  or  more  Member  States  at  NUTS  level  3 
regions26. This should not prevent Member States from applying the Mechanism also 
to maritime and external borders others than those with EFTA countries. 

(13) 

In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities which in some Member States 
will  include  national  and  regional  legislative  bodies,  within  a  given  Member  States 
and between those of one or  more neighbouring Member States,  each Member State 
which  opts  for  the  Mechanism  should  be  obliged  to  set  up  a  national  and,  where 
applicable,  regional  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  and  define  their  tasks  and 
competencies  during  the  different  steps  of  the  Mechanism  covering  initiation, 
conclusion, implementation and monitoring of Commitments and Statements. 

(14)  The Commission should set up a coordination point at  Union level, as  announced  in 
the  Border  Regions  Communication.  That  coordination  point  should  liaise  with  the 
different national and, where relevant, regional Cross-border Coordination Points. The 
Commission should set up and maintain a database on Commitments and Statements 
in  accordance  with  Regulation  (EC) No 45/2001  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of 
the Council27. 

(15)  This Regulation should set out the procedure to conclude a Commitment or Statement 
and  describe  in  detail  the  different  steps;  preparation  and  submission  of  an  initiative 
document,  a  preliminary  analysis  by  the  Member  State  which  is  to  apply  the  legal 
provisions  of  the  neighbouring  Member  State,  preparation  of  the  Commitment  or 
Statement  to  be  concluded  and  finally  the  conclusion  procedure  both  for  the 
Commitment  and  the  Statement.  The  elements  to  be  covered  in  the  initiative 

26 

27 

Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the 
establishment of a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) (OJ L 154, 21.6.2003, 
p. 1). 
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on 
the  protection  of  individuals  with  regard  to  the  processing  of  personal  data  by  the  Community 
institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1). 

EN 

13 

  EN 

 
                                                 
document, the draft and final Commitments and Statements should also be set out in 
detail as well as the applicable deadlines. 

(16)  More  specifically,  this  Regulation  should  define  who  can  be  an  initiator  of  a  joint 
project.  As  the  Mechanism  should  improve  the  implementation  of  joint  cross-border 
projects, the first group should be bodies initiating or both initiating and implementing 
such  joint project. The term project should be understood in a broad sense,  covering 
both a specific item of infrastructure or a number of activities with regard to a certain 
territory or both. Secondly, a local or regional authority located in a given cross-border 
region or exercising public power in that cross-border region should be empowered to 
take  the  initiative  to  apply  national  law  which  constitutes  an  obstacle,  but  the 
amendment  of  or  derogation  from  that  law  is  outside  their  institutional  competence. 
Thirdly,  bodies  set  up  for  cross-border  cooperation  located  in  or  covering  at  least 
partially a given cross-border region, including EGTCs, or similar bodies to organise 
cross-border  development  in  a  structured  way  should  be  initiator.  Finally,  bodies 
specialised  in  cross-border  cooperation  which  may  also  be  aware  of  effective 
resolutions  found  elsewhere  in  the  Union  for  a  comparable  issue  should  also  be 
enabled to start an initiative. In order to create synergy of bodies directly affected by 
the  obstacle  and  those  expert  in  cross-border  cooperation  in  general,  all  groups  may 
initiate the Mechanism jointly. 

(17)  The key actor in the Member States requested to conclude a Commitment or Statement 
should be the respective national or regional Cross-border Coordination Points which 
is to liaise with all competent authorities in its Member State and with its counterpart 
in the neighbouring Member State. It should also be clearly established that the Cross-
border Coordination Point may decide whether a procedure leading to the conclusion 
of a Commitment or a Statement is to be launched or whether for one or more legal 
obstacles a resolution has already found which could be applied. On the other hand, it 
should also be established that the Member State the legal provisions of which are to 
be applied in the other Member State may refuse such application outside its territory. 
Any decision should be justified and communicated. 

(18)  This Regulation should establish detailed rules on the implementation, application and 

monitoring of Commitments and Statements to be concluded and signed. 

(19)  The implementation of a self-executing Commitment should consist in the application 
of  national  provisions  of  another  Member  State.  This  should  mean  either  the 
amendment of legally binding administrative acts already adopted in accordance with 
the normally applicable national law or, where this has not yet been done, the adoption 
of  new  administrative  acts  based  on  the  legislation  of  another  Member  State.  Where 
several  authorities  are  each  competent  for  different  aspects  of  a  complex  legal 
obstacle,  the  Commitment  should  be  accompanied  by  a  timetable  for  each  of  these 
aspects. Respecting the subsidiarity principle, the adoption and transmission of those 
amended or new administrative acts should follow the national law on administrative 
procedures.  

(20)  The  implementation  of  Statements  should  mainly  consist  in  the  preparation  and 
submission  of  a  legislative  proposal  to  amend  existing  national  law  or  to  derogate 
from it. After adoption, those amendments or derogations should be made public and 
then  also  implemented  like  the  Commitments  by  the  amendment  and  adoption  of 
legally binding administrative acts. 

(21)  Based  on  the  legally  binding  acts,  the  respect  for  the  obligations  and  rights  of  the 
addressees thereof should be monitored. Member States should  be allowed to  decide 

EN 

14 

  EN 

 
whether  that  monitoring  is  entrusted  to  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State  which 
transferred its legal provisions because those authorities are more familiar with those 
rules  or  whether  that  monitoring  is  entrusted  to  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State 
where those provisions are applied because those authorities are more familiar with the 
remaining  legal  system  of  the  committing  Member  States  and  the  law  governing  the 
addressees. 

(22)  The  protection  of  persons  resident  in  cross-border  regions  directly  or  indirectly 
affected  by  the  application  and  monitoring  of  a  Commitment  and  the  amended 
legislation  pursuant  to  a  Statement,  who  consider  themselves  wronged  by  acts  or 
omissions by the application should be clarified. Both for Commitment and Statement, 
the  law  of  the  neighbouring  Member  State  would  be  applied  in  the  committing 
Member State as incorporated into its own legislation and the legal protection should 
therefore be in the remit of  the courts of the committing Member States even where 
persons  have  their  legal  residence  in  the  transferring  Member  State.  The  same 
principle  should  apply  for  the  legal  redress  against  the  Member  State  whose 
administrative act is challenged. However, a different approach should apply to legal 
redress  against  the  monitoring  of  the  application  of  the  Commitment  or  Statement. 
Where  an  authority  from  the  transferring  Member  State  has  accepted  to  monitor  the 
application of the amended legal provisions of the committing Member State and can 
act with regard to persons resident in the cross-border area on behalf of the authorities 
of the committing Member State, but in its own name, the competent courts should be 
those of the Member State where those persons have their legal residence. On the other 
hand, where the competent transferring authority cannot act in its own name, but in the 
name of the competent committing authority, the competent courts should be those of 
the committing Member State, regardless of the legal residence of the person. 

(23)  This  Regulation  should  set  out  rules  on  its  implementation,  the  monitoring  of  its 
application and on the obligations of the Member States with regard to their national 
implementing rules. 

(24) 

In order to establish a database according to Article 8,implementing powers should be 
conferred  on  the  Commission  to  lay  down  rules  on  its  running,  on  the  protection  of 
data and the model to be used when information on the implementation and on the use 
of  the  Mechanism  is  submitted  by  Cross-border  Coordination  Points.  Those  powers 
should  be  exercised  in  accordance  with  the  advisory  procedure  under  Regulation 
(EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council28. For practical and 
coordination purposes, the ‘Coordination Committee for the European Structural and 
Investment Funds’ should be the committee competent for the procedure of adoption 
of implementing acts. 

(25)  The  national  implementing  rules  are  to  specify  which  border  regions  of  a  given 
Member  State  are  covered  by  the  Commitment  or  the  Statement.  Consequently,  the 
Commission  will  be  in  a  position  to  assess  whether  for  the  border  which  is  not 
mentioned the Member State has opted for a different mechanism. 

(26)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised 
by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to 
the  protection  of  personal  data  (Article  8),  the  right  to  education  (Article  14),  the 
freedom  to  choose  an  occupation  and  the  right  to  engage  in  work  (Article  15),  in 

28 

Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  February  2011 
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of 
the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13). 

EN 

15 

  EN 

 
                                                 
particular  the  freedom  to  seek  employment,  to  work,  to  exercise  the  right  of 
establishment  and  to  provide  services  in  any  Member  State,  the  freedom  to  conduct  
business (Article 16), access to social security and social assistance (Article 34), acces 
to health care (Article 35) and access to services of general economic interest (Article 
36). 

(27)  The  conditions  for  territorial  cooperation  should  be  created  in  accordance  with  the 
subsidiarity principle enshrined in Article 5(3) of the Treaty on the European Union. 
Member States have undertaken individual, bilateral or even multilateral initiatives to 
resolve legal border obstacles. However, those mechanisms do not exist in all Member 
States  or  not  for  all  borders  of  a  given  Member  State.  The  financing  instruments 
(mainly Interreg) and the legal instruments (mainly EGTCs) provided at Union  level 
so far have not been sufficient to resolve legal border obstacles throughout the Union . 
The objectives of the proposed action can consequently not be sufficiently achieved by 
the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, 
by reason  of the scale or  effects of  the proposed action,  be better  achieved at Union 
level. Further action by the Union legislator is therefore needed. 

(28) 

In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in Article 5(4) TEU, the 
content and form of Union action should not exceed what is necessary to achieve the 
objectives  of  the  Treaties.  The  recourse  to  the  specific  Mechanism  set  up  under  this 
Regulation is voluntary. Where a Member State decides, on a specific border with one 
or  more  neighbouring  Member  States,  to  continue  to  resolve  legal  obstacles  in  a 
specific  cross-border  region  under  the  effective  mechanisms  it  has  set  up  at  national 
level  or  which  it  has  set  up  formally  or  informally,  together  with  one  or  more 
neighbouring  Member  States,  the  Mechanism  set  up  under  this  Regulation  does  not 
need  to  be  selected.  Likewise,  where  a  Member  State  decides,  on  a  specific  border 
with  one  or  more  neighbouring  Member  States,  to  join  an  existing  effective 
mechanism  set  up  formally  or  informally  by  one  or  more  neighbouring  Member 
States,  provided  that  mechanism  allows  for  accession,  again,  the  Mechanism  set  up 
under this Regulation does not need to be selected. This Regulation does therefore not 
go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve its objectives for those cross-border 
regions,  for  which  Member  States  have  no  efficient  mechanisms  to  resolve  legal 
obstacles in place, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

CHAPTER I 
General provisions 

Article 1 
Subject matter 

1. 

This  Regulation  sets  up  a  mechanism  to  allow  for  the  application  in  one  Member 
State,  with  regard  to  a  cross-border  region,  of  the  legal  provisions  from  another 
Member  State,  where  the  application  of  the  legal  provisions  of  the  former  would 
constitute  a  legal  obstacle  hampering  the  implementation  of  a  joint  Project  ('the 
Mechanism'). 

2. 

The Mechanism shall consist of one of the following measures:  

(a) 

the  conclusion  of  a  European  Cross-Border  Commitment,  which  is  self-
executing, 

EN 

16 

  EN 

 
(b) 

the  conclusion  of  a  European  Cross-Border  Statement  which  would  require  a 
legislative procedure in the Member State.  

3. 

This Regulation also lays down  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

the organisation and tasks of Cross-border Coordination Points in the Member 
States, 

the coordinating role of the Commission with respect to the Mechanism, 

the legal protection of persons resident in a cross-border region with regard to 
the Mechanism. 

Article 2 
Scope 

1. 

2. 

This Regulation applies to cross-border regions as defined in point (1) of Article 3.  

Where a Member State comprises several territorial entities with legislative powers, 
this Regulation shall also apply to those territorial entities including their respective 
authorities or legal provisions. 

Article 3 
Definitions 

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

'cross-border region' means the territory covered by neighbouring land border regions 
in two or more Member States at NUTS level 3 regions;  

'joint project' means any item of infrastructure with an impact in a given cross-border 
region or any service of general economic interest provided in a given cross-border 
region; 

'legal  provision'  means  any  legal  or  administrative  provision,  rule  or  administrative 
practice applicable to a joint project, regardless whether adopted or implemented by 
a legislative or executive body; 

'legal obstacle' means any legal provision with regard to the planning, development, 
staffing,  financing  or  functioning  of  a  joint  project  that  obstructs  the  inherent 
potential of a border region when interacting across the border; 

'initiator'  means  the  actor  who  identifies  the  legal  obstacle  and  triggers  the 
Mechanism by submitting an initiative document; 

'initiative  document'  means  the  document  prepared  by  one  or  more  initiators  to 
trigger the Mechanism; 

'committing Member State' means the Member State on the territory of which one or 
more  legal  provisions  from  a  transferring  Member  State  will  apply  under  a  given 
European Cross-border Commitment (the “Commitment”) or European Cross-border 
Statement  (the  “Statement”)  or  where,  in  the  absence  of  an  appropriate  legal 
provision, an ad hoc legal resolution will be established; 

'transferring  Member  State'  means  the  Member  State  whose  legal  provisions  will 
apply in the committing Member State under a given Commitment  or  Statement; 

'competent  committing  authority'  means  the  authority  in  the  committing  Member 
State  competent to  accept  the application  of the  legal provisions of the transferring 

EN 

17 

  EN 

 
Member  State  on  its  territory  under  a  given  Commitment    or,  in  the  case  of  a 
Statement,  to  commit  itself  to  starting  the  legislative  procedure  needed  for  a 
derogation from its domestic legal provisions; 

'competent  transferring  authority'  means  the  authority  in  the  transferring  Member 
State  competent  for  the  adoption  of  the  legal  provisions  which  will  apply  in  the 
committing Member State and for its application on its own territory or for both; 

'area of application' means the area in the committing Member State where the legal 
provision of the transferring Member State or an ad hoc legal resolution shall apply. 

(10) 

(11) 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

1. 

Article 4 
Member States' options for resolving legal obstacles 

Member State shall either opt for the Mechanism or opt for existing ways to resolve 
legal  obstacles  hampering  the  implementation  of  a  joint  project  in  cross-border 
regions on a specific border with one or more neighbouring Member States. 

A Member State may also decide, with regard to a specific border with one or more 
neighbouring  Member  States,  to  join  an  existing  effective  way  set  up  formally  or 
informally by one or more neighbouring Member States. 

Member  States  may  also  use  the  Mechanism  in  cross-border  regions  on  maritime 
borders or  in cross-border regions  between one or  more Member  States and  one or 
more third countries or one or more overseas countries and territories.  

Member  States  shall  inform  the  Commission  about  any  decision  taken  under  this 
Article. 

Article 5 
Cross-border Coordination Points 

Where a Member State opts for the Mechanism, it shall establish one or more Cross-
border Coordination Points in one of the following ways: 

(a)  designate,  at  national  or  regional  level  or  at  both  levels,  a  Cross-border 

Coordination Point as a separate body; 

(b) 

(c) 

set up a Cross-border Coordination Point within an existing authority or body, 
at national or regional level; 

entrust an appropriate authority or body with the additional tasks as national or 
regional Cross-border Coordination Point. 

2. 

Committing Member States and transferring Member States shall also determine: 

(a)  whether 

it 

is 

the  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  or  a  competent 
committing/transferring authority which may conclude and sign a Commitment  
and decide the applicable national law will be derogated from  the date of the 
entry into force of that Commitment; or 

(b)  whether 

it 

is 

the  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  or  a  competent 
committing/transferring  authority  which  may  sign  a  Statement  and  state  
formally therein that the competent committing authority will do the necessary 
as  to  legislative  or  other  acts  be  taken  by  the  competent  legislative  bodies  in 
that Member State by a given deadline. 

EN 

18 

  EN 

 
3. 

The  Member  States  shall  inform  the  Commission  of  the  designated  Cross-border 
Coordination points by the date of the start of application of this Regulation. 

Article 6 
Tasks of Cross-border Coordination Points  

1. 

Each Cross-border Coordination Points shall have at least the following tasks: 

(a) 

(b) 

implement the procedure set out in Articles 10 and 11; 

coordinate  the  preparation,  signature,  implementation  and  monitoring  for  all 
Commitments and Statements concerning the territory of its Member State; 

(c)  build up and maintain a database covering all Cross-border Coordination Points  

concerning the territory of its Member State; 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

liaise,  where  they  exist,  with  the  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  in  the 
neighbouring Member State or States and with the Cross-border Coordination 
Points  in  other  territorial  entities  with  legislative  powers  of  its  own  Member 
State or another Member State; 

liaise with the Commission; 

support 
Commitments. 

the  Commission  as  regards 

its  database  on  Statements  and 

2. 

Each Member State or each territorial entity with legislative powers in that Member 
State may decide to entrust the respective Cross-border Coordination Point also with 
the following tasks:  

(a)  where applicable, to conclude Commitments or Statements pursuant to Articles 

16(2) and 17(2); 

(b)  upon  request  from  a  given  initiator,  support  that  initiator  by,  among  other 
things,  identifying  the  competent  committing  authority  in  the  same  Member 
State or the competent transferring authority in another Member State; 

(c)  upon request from a given competent committing authority located in another 
Member  State  without  its  own  Cross-border  Coordination  point,  perform  the 
preliminary analysis of an initiative document; 

(d)  monitor  the  implementation  of  all  Commitments  and  Statements  concerning 

the territory of its Member State; 

(e) 

remind  the  competent  committing  authority  to  comply  with  the  deadlines 
established by in a given Commitment or Statement  and request a reply within 
a given deadline; 

(f) 

inform  the  authority  supervising  the  competent  committing  authority  on  any 
missed deadlines as established in a given Commitment or Statement. 

Where  at  least  one  among  several  legal  obstacles  concerns  an  issue  of  legislative 
competence  at  national  level,  the  national  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  shall 
assume the tasks set out in Articles 9 to 17 and coordinate with the relevant regional 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point  or  Points  in  the  same  Member  State,  unless  the 
Member State has decided that the tasks set out in Articles 14 to 17 are entrusted to a 
competent committing authority at national level. 

3. 

EN 

19 

  EN 

 
4. 

Where  none  of  the  legal  obstacles  concerns  an  issue  of  legislative  competence  at 
national level, the competent regional Cross-border Coordination Point shall assume 
the  tasks  set  out  in  Articles  9  to  17  and  coordinate,  with  the  other  regional  Cross-
border Coordination  Point or Points in the same Member States, in the cases where 
more than one territorial entity is concerned by the joint project, unless the Member 
State has decided that the tasks set out in Articles 14 to 17 are entrusted to a national 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point.  That 
regional  Cross-border 
Coordination Point shall keep the national Cross-border Coordination Point informed 
about any Commitment or Statement procedure. 

competent 

Article 7 
Coordination tasks of the Commission 

1. 

The Commission shall fulfil the following coordination tasks: 

(a) 

liaise with the Cross-border Coordination Points; 

2. 

1. 

2. 

(b)  publish  and  keep  an  up-dated  list  of  all  national  and  regional  Cross-border 

Coordination Points;  

(c) 

set up and maintain a database on all Commitments and Statements. 

The Commission shall adopt an implementing act with regard to the functioning of 
the  database  referred  to  in  point  (c) of  paragraph  1  and  the  forms  to  be  used  when 
information on the implementation and on the use of the Mechanism is submitted by 
Cross-border  Coordination  Points.  That  implementing  act  shall  be  adopted  in 
accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 23(2). 

CHAPTER II 
Procedure for concluding and signing a Commitment or for 
signing a Statement 

Article 8 
Preparation and submission of the initiative document 

The  initiator  shall  identify  the  legal  obstacle  with  regard  to  the  planning, 
development, staffing, financing or functioning of a joint project. 

The initiator shall be one of the following:  

(a) 

the  public  or  private  body  responsible  for  initiating  or  both  initiating  and 
implementing a joint project;  

(b)  one or more local or regional authorities located in a given cross-border region 

or exercising public power in that cross-border region;  

(c) 

(d) 

a  body  with  or  without  legal  personality  set  up  for  cross-border  cooperation 
located in or covering at least partially a given cross-border region, including 
territorial  cooperation  under  Regulation  (EC) 
European  groupings  of 
No 1082/2006, Euroregions, Euregios and similar bodies;  

an  organisation  set  up  on  behalf  of  cross-border  regions  with  the  aim  to 
promote the interests of cross-border territories and to facilitate the networking 
of players and the sharing of experiences, such as the Association of European 

EN 

20 

  EN 

 
Border  Regions,  the  Mission  Opérationnelle  Transfrontalière  or  the  Central 
European Service for Cross-border Initiatives; or 

(e) 

several of the entities referred to in points (a) to (d) jointly. 

3. 

4. 

The  initiator  shall  prepare  an  initiative  document  drafted  in  accordance  with 
Article 9. 

The  initiator  shall  submit  the  initiative  document  to  the  competent  Cross-border 
Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member  State  and  send  a  copy  to  the 
competent Cross-border Coordination Point of the transferring Member State. 

Article 9 
Content of the initiative document 

1. 

The initiative document shall include at least the following elements: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

a description of the joint project and of its context, of the corresponding legal 
obstacle  in  the  committing  Member  State  as  well  as  of  the  rationale  for 
resolving the legal obstacle; 

a list of the specific legal provisions of the transferring Member State resolving 
the legal obstacle or, where no appropriate legal provision exists, a proposal for 
an ad hoc legal resolution;  

a justification for the area of application; 

the foreseeable duration or, where duly justified, its unlimited duration; 

a list of the competent committing authority or authorities; 

a list of the competent transferring authority or authorities. 

The area of application shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the effective 
implementation of the joint project. 

Article 10 
Preliminary analysis of the initiative document by the committing Member State 

The  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  shall  analyse  the  initiative 
document.  It  shall  liaise  with  all  competent  committing  authorities  and  with  the 
national  or,  where  relevant,  other  regional  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  in  the 
committing Member State and with the national Cross-border Coordination Point in 
the transferring Member State. 

Within  three  months  after  receipt  of  the  initiative  document  the  competent  Cross-
border  Coordination  Point  shall  take,  one  or  more  of  the  following  actions,  to  be 
transmitted to the initiator in writing: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

inform  the  initiator  that  the  initiative  document  was  prepared  in  accordance 
with Article 9 and is therefore admissible; 

request,  if  necessary,  the  submission  of  a  revised  initiative  document  or  of 
additional specific information while setting out why and in which aspect the 
initiative document is not considered sufficient; 

inform  the  initiator  about  its  assessment  that  there  is  no  legal  obstacle  while 
setting out the reasons and also referring to the means of legal redress against 
that decision under the law of the committing Member State; 

2. 

1. 

2. 

EN 

21 

  EN 

 
(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

inform the initiator about its assessment that the legal obstacle consists in one 
of  the  cases  listed  in  Article  12(4)  and  describe  the  commitment  of  the 
competent committing authority, to change or adapt that legal obstacle; 

inform the initiator about its assessment that the legal obstacle consists in one 
of  the  situations  under  Article  12(4)  while  setting  out  its  reasons  to  refuse  to 
change or adapt that legal obstacle and referring to the means of legal redress 
against that decision under the law of the committing Member State; 

commit itself towards the initiator to find a resolution to the legal obstacle or 
obstacles within six months, either by signing a Commitment with the Cross-
border  Coordination  point  of  the  transferring  Member  State  or  with  the 
competent  transferring  authority,  as  designated  by  the  transferring  Member 
State, or by proposing an ad hoc legal resolution within the legal framework of 
the committing Member State. 

3. 

In duly justified cases, the competent committing authority may extend the deadline 
referred to in point (f) of paragraph 2 once,  by  a maximum of six months and shall 
inform the initiator and the transferring Member State accordingly, while setting out 
the reasons in writing. 

Article 11 
Preliminary analysis of the initiative document by the transferring Member State 

Upon receipt of an initiative document, the competent Cross-border Coordination Point of the 
transferring Member State shall also carry out the tasks listed in Article 10(2) and may send 
its preliminary reaction to the competent Cross-border Coordination Point of the committing 
Member State. 

Article 12 
Follow-up on the preliminary analysis of the initiative document 

Where  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member 
State requests a revised initiative document or additional specific information, it shall 
analyse the revised initiative document or the additional specific information or both 
and  take,  within  three  months  after  receipt  thereof,  the  actions  as  if  the  initiative 
document was submitted for the first time. 

Where  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member 
State considers that the revised initiative document is still not prepared in accordance 
with  Article  10  or  that  the  additional  specific  information  is  still  not  sufficient,  it 
shall, within three months after receipt of the revised initiative document, inform the 
initiator in writing about its decision to end the procedure. This decision shall be duly 
justified. 

Where  the  analysis  by  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the 
committing Member State or the competent committing authority concludes that the 
legal obstacle described in the initiative document is based on a misunderstanding or 
misinterpretation  of  the  relevant  legislation  or  on  the  lack  of  sufficient  information 
about the relevant legislation, the procedure ends by informing the initiator about the 
assessment that there is no legal obstacle. 

Where  the  legal  obstacle  consists  only  in  an  administrative  provision,  rule  or 
administrative  practice  of  the  committing  Member  State  or  in  a  an  administrative 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

EN 

22 

  EN 

 
provision,  rule  or  administrative  practice  clearly  distinct  from  a  provision  adopted 
under  a  legislative  procedure  and  can  therefore  be  changed  or  adapted  without  a 
legislative procedure, the competent committing authority shall inform the initiator in 
writing  its  refusal  or  willingness  to  change  or  adapt  the  relevant  administrative 
provision, rule or administrative practice within eight months. 

5. 

In duly justified cases, the competent committing authority may extend the deadline 
referred to in paragraph 4 once by a maximum of eight months and shall  inform the 
initiator and the transferring Member State accordingly, while setting out the reasons 
in writing. 

Article 13 
Preparation of the draft Commitment or Statement 

The  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  or  the  competent  committing  authority  of  the 
committing  Member  State  shall  draw  up  a  draft  Commitment  or  a  draft  Statement  in 
accordance with Article 14, based on the initiative document.  

Article 14 
Content of the draft Commitment and draft Statement 

1. 

The draft Commitment shall include at least the following elements:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

(g) 

the description of the joint project and of its context, of the corresponding legal 
obstacle as well as of the rationale for resolving the legal obstacle; 

the  list  of  the  specific  legal  provision  or  provisions  constituting  the  legal 
obstacle and which shall therefore not apply to the joint project; 

the area of application; 

the duration of the application and a justification for that duration; 

the competent committing authority or authorities; 

the specific legal provision of the transferring Member State which shall apply 
to the joint project; 

the  proposal  of  the  ad  hoc  legal  resolution,  where  no  appropriate  legal 
provision exists in the legal framework of the transferring Member State; 

(h) 

the competent transferring authority or authorities;  

(i) 

(j) 

the authority or  authorities  from the committing Member State competent for 
the implementation and monitoring; 

the  authority  or  authorities  from  the  transferring  Member  State  which  are 
proposed to be designated jointly for the implementation and monitoring; 

(k) 

the date of its entry into force. 

The date of entry into force referred to in point (k) shall be either the date when the 
last  of  the  two  Cross-border  Coordination  Points  or  competent  authorities  have 
signed or the date when it has been notified to the initiator. 

2. 

In  addition  to  the  elements  listed  in  paragraph  1,  the  draft  Commitment  shall  also 
include a date of application which may be 

(a) 

set at the same date as its entry into force; 

EN 

23 

  EN 

 
(b) 

set with retroactive effect; 

(c)  deferred to a date in the future. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

In  addition  to  the  elements  listed  in  paragraph  1,  the  draft  Statement  shall  also 
include a formal statement of the date or dates by which each competent committing 
authority shall submit a formal proposal to the respective legislative body in order to 
amend the national legal provisions accordingly.  

The date referred to in  the first subparagraph shall  not  be later than twelve  months 
after the conclusion of the Statement. 

Article 15 
Transmission of the draft Commitment or draft Statement 

Where  the  competent  committing  authority  has  prepared  the  draft  Commitment  or 
draft  Statement,  it  shall  transmit  this  draft  to  the  competent  Cross-border 
Coordination Point of the committing Member State: 

(a)  within a maximum of three months after having transmitted information under 

Article 10(2) or Article 12(1) and (2);  

(b)  within a maximum of eight months pursuant to Article 12(4) and (5). 

Where  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member 
State has prepared the draft Commitment or draft Statement or where it has received 
it  from  the  competent  committing  authority  it  shall  transmit  this  draft  to  the 
competent Cross-border Coordination Point of the transferring Member State within 
the periods referred to in points (a) or (b) of paragraph 1. 

3. 

In both cases, a copy shall also be sent for information to the initiator.  

Article 16 
Tasks of the transferring Member State in concluding and signing the Commitment or in 
signing the Statement  

1. 

The  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  transferring  Member  State 
shall examine the draft Commitment or draft Statement received pursuant to Article 
15  and,  within  a  maximum  of  three  months  after  receipt  of  the  draft  and  after 
consulting the competent transferring authorities, take one or more of the following 
actions: 

(a) 

(b) 

agree with the draft Commitment or draft Statement, sign two original copies 
and  send  one  back  to  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the 
committing Member State; 

agree  with  the  draft  Commitment  or  draft  Statement,  after  correcting  or 
supplementing the information referred to in points (f) and (h) of Article 14(1), 
sign  two  original  copies  of  the  revised  draft  Commitment  or  draft  Statement 
and send one back to the competent Cross-border Coordination Point of the of 
the committing Member State;  

(c) 

refuse to sign the draft Commitment or draft Statement and transmit a detailed 
justification  to  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the 
committing Member State; 

EN 

24 

  EN 

 
(d) 

refuse  to  sign  the  draft  Commitment  or  draft  Statement  and  send  back  an 
amended  draft  as  regards  the  information  referred  to  in  points  (c),  (d)  and, 
where  relevant,  (g)  of  Article  14(1),  as  well  as  for  the  draft  Commitment  the 
information  referred  to  under  Article  14(2),  with  a  justification  for  the 
amendments  to  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the 
committing Member State. 

In  Member  States  where  the  competent  transferring  authority  shall  sign  a 
Commitment  or  Statement,  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the 
transferring  Member  State  shall  send,  in  accordance  with  points  (a)  and  (b)  of 
paragraph 1, the two original copies signed by the competent transferring authority. 

Where  the  transferring  Member  State  agrees  in  accordance  with  point  (a)  or  (b)  of 
paragraph  1  to  sign  a  Commitment  or  a  Statement,  it  shall,  in  addition,  explicitly 
confirm or refuse that the competent authority or authorities which are proposed to 
be designated jointly for the implementation and monitoring of the Commitment or 
the  Statement  pursuant  to  point  (j)  of  Article 14(1)  shall  assume  those  tasks  to  be 
carried out in the area of application. 

2. 

3. 

Article 17 
Tasks of the committing Member State in concluding and signing the Commitment or in 
signing the Statement 

1. 

The  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member  State 
shall  examine  the  reply  transmitted  by  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination 
Point  of  the  transferring  Member  State  and  take,  within  a  maximum  of  one  month 
after  its  receipt  one  or  more  of  the  following  actions,  to  be  transmitted  to  the 
competent transferring authority in writing: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

in  the  case  of  point  (a)  of  paragraph  2,  finalise  the  Commitment  or  the 
Statement, sign two original copies and send one back to the competent Cross-
border Coordination Point of the transferring Member State for signature; 

in  the  case  of  point  (b)  of  paragraph  2,  amend  the  Commitment  or  the 
Statement  as  regards  the  information  in  the  draft  Commitment  or  the  draft 
Statement  covered  by  points  (f)  and  (h)  of  Article  14(1)  accordingly,  finalise 
the Commitment or Statement, sign two original copies and send one back to 
the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  transferring  Member 
State for signature; 

in the case of point (c) of paragraph 2, inform the initiator and the Commission, 
while adding the justification as set out by the competent transferring authority; 

in  the  case  of  point  (d)  of  paragraph  2,  consider  the  amendments  and  either 
proceed  as  under  point  (b)  of  this  paragraph  or  relaunch  a  second  procedure 
under  Article  9  setting  out  why  some  or  all  of  the  amendments  could  not  be 
accepted by the competent committing authority. 

Upon receipt of the Commitment or the Statement, as also signed by the competent 
Cross-border Coordination Point or competent transferring authority in the cases of 
points (a) or (b) of paragraph 1 or, where the competent Cross-border Coordination 
Point  of  the  transferring  Member  State  has  reacted  positively  under  the  second 
procedure  of  point  (d)  of  paragraph  1,  the  competent  Cross-border  Coordination 
Point of the committing Member State shall: 

2. 

EN 

25 

  EN 

 
(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

transmit the final Commitment or Statement to the initiator; 

transmit the second original copy to the competent Cross-border Coordination 
Point of the transferring Member State; 

send a copy to all competent committing authorities; 

send a copy to the coordination point at Union level; and 

request the competent service in the committing Member State responsible for 
official publications to publish the Commitment or the Statement. 

CHAPTER III 
Implementation and monitoring of Commitments and Statements 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

1. 

2. 

Article 18 
Implementation of the Commitment 

The information referred to under point (c) of Article 17(2) and sent to all competent 
committing  authorities  concerned,  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  timetable,  by  which 
each of those authorities shall, where relevant, amend any administrative act adopted 
under the applicable law with regard to the joint project and adopt any administrative 
act necessary to apply the Commitment to the joint project in order to apply to it the 
legal provision of the transferring Member State or an ad hoc legal resolution. 

A  copy  of  the  timetable  shall  be  sent  to  the  national  and,  where  relevant,  regional 
Cross-border Coordination Point of the committing Member State. 

Any administrative act referred to in paragraph 1 shall be adopted and notified to the 
initiator, in particular to the public or private body responsible for initiating or both 
initiating  and  implementing  a  joint  project,  in  accordance  with  the  national  law 
applicable to such administrative acts. 

Once  all  administrative  acts  with  regard  to  a  given  joint  project  are  adopted,  the 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member  State  shall  inform  the 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  transferring  Member  State  and  the 
coordination point at Union level. 

The Cross-border Coordination Point of the transferring Member State shall inform, 
where relevant, the competent transferring authorities. 

Article 19 
Implementation of the Statement 

Each competent committing authority listed in a Statement under Article 14(3) shall 
submit by the respective date fixed in the signed Statement a formal proposal to the 
respective  legislative  body  in  order  to  amend  the  national  legal  provisions 
accordingly. 

In  case  the  respective  date  fixed  in  the  signed  Statement  cannot  be  respected,  in 
particular  in  view  of  upcoming  elections  for  the  competent  legislative  body,  the 
competent  committing  authority  shall  inform  in  writing  the  initiator  as  well  as  the 
competent  Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  both  the  committing  and  the 
transferring Member States. 

EN 

26 

  EN 

 
3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

1. 

2. 

Once  a  formal  proposal  has  been  submitted  to  the  respective  legislative  body,  the 
respective  competent  committing  authority  shall  up-date  in  writing  the  initiator  as 
well as the competent Cross-border Coordination Point of both  the  committing and 
the  transferring  Member  States  about  the  monitoring  in  the  respective  legislative 
body, and this every six months after the date of formal submission. 

Upon entry into force of the amending legislative act or its publication in the official 
Gazette  or  both,  each  competent  committing  authority  shall  amend  any 
administrative act adopted under the applicable national law with regard to the joint 
project  and  adopt  any  administrative  act  necessary  to  apply  the  amended  legal 
provisions to the joint project. 

Any administrative act as referred to in paragraph 4 shall be adopted and notified to 
the initiator, in particular where this initiator is a public or private body responsible 
for initiating or both initiating and implementing a joint project, in accordance with 
the national law applicable to such administrative acts. 

Once  all  administrative  acts  with  regard  to  a  given  joint  project  are  adopted,  the 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  committing  Member  State  shall  inform  the 
Cross-border  Coordination  Point  of  the  transferring  Member  State  and  the 
coordination point at Union level. 

The Cross-border Coordination Point of the transferring Member State shall, where 
relevant, inform the competent transferring authorities. 

Article 20 
Monitoring of Commitments and Statements 

Based  on  the  administrative  acts  referred  to  in  Articles  18(1)  and  19(4),  the 
committing  and  transferring  Member  States  shall  decide  whether the  monitoring  of 
the application of a Commitment or of the amended national legislation pursuant to a 
Statement  shall  be  entrusted  to  the  authorities  of  the  transferring  Member  State,  in 
particular  due  to  their  expertise  with  the  legal  provisions  transferred,  or  to  the 
authorities of the committing Member State. 

Where  the  monitoring  of  the  application  of  the  transferred  legal  provisions  is 
entrusted to the authorities of the transferring Member State, the committing Member 
State  shall  decide,  in  agreement  with  transferring  Member  States,  whether  the 
authorities of the transferring Member State shall act with regard to the addressees of 
the monitoring tasks on behalf and in the name of the authorities of the committing 
Member State or on behalf, but in their own name. 

CHAPTER IV 
Legal protection against the application and monitoring of 
Commitments and Statements 

Article 21 
Legal protection against the application of a Commitment or Statement 

1. 

Any  person  resident  in  the  territory  covered  by  a  Commitment  or  Statement  or, 
although  not  resident  in  that  territory,  being  user  of  a  service  of  general  economic 
interest provided in  that  territory  ('person resident in  the cross-border region'),  who 
considers  itself  wronged  by  the  acts  or  omissions  by  the  application,  pursuant  to  a 

EN 

27 

  EN 

 
Commitment  or  a  Statement,  of  a  legal  provision  of  a  transferring  Member  State 
shall  be  entitled  to  seek  legal  redress  before  the  courts  of  the  committing  Member 
State. 

However,  the  competent  courts  for  legal  redress  against  any  administrative  acts 
adopted under Article 18(3) and 19(5) shall be exclusively the courts of the Member 
State whose authorities issued the administrative act. 

Nothing  in  this  Regulation  shall  deprive  persons  from  exercising  their  national 
constitutional rights of appeal against authorities which are parties of a Commitment 
in respect of: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

administrative  decisions  in  respect  of  activities  which  are  being  carried  out 
pursuant to a Commitment; 

access to services in their own language; and 

access to information. 

In these cases the competent courts shall be those of the Member State under whose 
constitution the rights of appeal arise. 

Article 22 
Legal protection against the monitoring of Commitments or Statements 

Where  the competent transferring authority has accepted to  monitor  the application 
of the legal provisions of the transferring Member State in the relevant area and can 
act  in  its  own  name  towards  persons  resident  in  the  cross-border  region  of  the 
committing Member State, the competent courts for legal redress against any action 
or  omission  by  that  authority  shall  be  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  where  those 
persons have their legal residence. 

Where  the competent transferring authority has accepted to  monitor  the application 
of  the  legal  provisions  of  the  committing  Member  State  on  the  territory  of  the 
committing Member State, but cannot act on its own name towards persons resident 
in the cross-border region, the competent courts for legal redress against any action 
or  omission  by  that  authority  shall  be  only  the  courts  of  the  committing  Member 
State, including for persons having their legal residence in the transferring Member 
State. 

CHAPTER V 
Final provisions 

Article 23 
Committee procedure 

The Commission shall be assisted by the Coordination Committee for the European 
Structural  and  Investment  Funds  established  by  Article 108(1)  of  Regulation  (EU) 
No [new  CPR].  That  committee  shall  be  a  committee  within  the  meaning  of 
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

Where 
is  made 
(EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. 

reference 

to 

this  paragraph,  Article  4  of  Regulation 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

EN 

28 

  EN 

 
Article 24 
Implementing provisions in the Member States  

1. 

2. 

3. 

Member States shall make such provisions as are appropriate to ensure the effective 
application of this Regulation 

By the date of the start of application of this Regulation, Member States shall inform 
the Commission accordingly of any provisions adopted under paragraph 1. 

The  Commission  shall  render  public  the  information  received  from  the  Member 
States. 

Article 25 
Reporting  
By dd mm yyyy [i.e. the 1st of the month following the entry into force of this Regulation + 
five years; to be filled in by the Publication Office], the Commission shall present a report to 
the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  assessing  the 
application of this Regulation based on indicators on its effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, 
European added value and scope for simplification. 

Article 26 
Entry into force and application 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Union.  
It shall apply from [the 1st of the month following the entry into force of this Regulation + one 
year; to be filled in by the Publication Office].  
However,  Article 24 shall  apply  from  [the  1st  of  the  month  following  the  entry  into  force  of 
this Regulation; to be filled in by the Publication Office]. 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

29 

  EN