natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This category also includes (among others) textiles, footwear, information technology, specific types of motor vehicles, electrical material and certain foodstuffs.
This category also includes (among others) textiles, footwear, information technology, specific types of motor vehicles, electrical material and certain foodstuffs.
There are three main reasons for the weak functioning of mutual recognition:
There are three main reasons for the weak functioning of mutual recognition:
(i) Member states not applying the principle correctly or at all.
(i) Member states not applying the principle correctly or at all.
(ii) Lack of knowledge on the part of both the economic operators and Member States about the principle of mutual recognition.
(ii) Lack of knowledge on the part of both the economic operators and Member States about the principle of mutual recognition.
(iii) Legal uncertainty on how the principle should be implemented in practice.
(iii) Legal uncertainty on how the principle should be implemented in practice.
Main points of the Commission's proposal
Main points of the Commission's proposal
Scope of the proposal (Articles 2 and 3).
Scope of the proposal (Articles 2 and 3).
The regulation applies to decisions having the direct or indirect effect that the product lawfully marketed in another Member State cannot remain or cannot be put on the market of another Member State in its current form.
The regulation applies to decisions having the direct or indirect effect that the product lawfully marketed in another Member State cannot remain or cannot be put on the market of another Member State in its current form.
Products concerned fall under technical rules which are not subject of harmonisation at Community level.
Products concerned fall under technical rules which are not subject of harmonisation at Community level.
Procedure in case a Member State intends to apply its own technical rules (Articles 4, 5 and 6).
Procedure in case a Member State intends to apply its own technical rules (Articles 4, 5 and 6).
In case the authority decides to implement its own technical rule (i.e. when mutual recognition is not applied for any reason), the authority is required to justify the reasons for doing so.
In case the authority decides to implement its own technical rule (i.e. when mutual recognition is not applied for any reason), the authority is required to justify the reasons for doing so.
The economic operator concerned is given 20 days to react on the justification of the authorities before the authorities can take the final decision on applying or not applying its own technical rules.
The economic operator concerned is given 20 days to react on the justification of the authorities before the authorities can take the final decision on applying or not applying its own technical rules.
Tasks of the Product Contact Points (Articles 7 and 8).
Tasks of the Product Contact Points (Articles 7 and 8).
The main task involves providing information on technical rules to enterprises and to the competent authorities of other member States.
The main task involves providing information on technical rules to enterprises and to the competent authorities of other member States.
Telematics network (Article 9).
Telematics network (Article 9).
This article gives the possibility to establish a telematics network, in accordance with Decision 2004/387/EC to enhance the application of mutual recognition.
This article gives the possibility to establish a telematics network, in accordance with Decision 2004/387/EC to enhance the application of mutual recognition.
A reporting scheme (Article 10) on the implementation of this regulation is laid down in this article.
A reporting scheme (Article 10) on the implementation of this regulation is laid down in this article.
Rapporteur's position
Rapporteur's position
The Rapporteur fully endorses the Commission's aim at making the principle of mutual recognition to work up to its full potential and to give legal clarity to economic operators as well as to Member States on how the principle should be implemented.
The Rapporteur fully endorses the Commission's aim at making the principle of mutual recognition to work up to its full potential and to give legal clarity to economic operators as well as to Member States on how the principle should be implemented.
Subject-matter and scope (Chapter 1)
Subject-matter and scope (Chapter 1)
The Rapporteur considers that the Proposal should state more clearly its principal aim, namely to ensure the free movement of goods in the non-harmonised area.
The Rapporteur considers that the Proposal should state more clearly its principal aim, namely to ensure the free movement of goods in the non-harmonised area.
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
In order to bring more legal clarity, industrially manufactured products have been changed to all products.
In order to bring more legal clarity, industrially manufactured products have been changed to all products.
Products produced for own use, for example, are still excluded as these products are not marketed in any Member State at any point of time.
Products produced for own use, for example, are still excluded as these products are not marketed in any Member State at any point of time.
The Rapporteur considers that to ban a product is equivalent to the refusal or withdrawal of the product from the market.
The Rapporteur considers that to ban a product is equivalent to the refusal or withdrawal of the product from the market.
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
The definition of 'technical rule' has been taken from Directive 98/34/EC.
The definition of 'technical rule' has been taken from Directive 98/34/EC.
For enhanced clarity the Rapporteur groups testing and certificates as a separate sub-paragraph.
For enhanced clarity the Rapporteur groups testing and certificates as a separate sub-paragraph.
Whereas the existence of conformity assessment procedures (or prior authorisation procedures in line with ECJ rulings) do not constitute a technical rule, all testing and test methods and certificates are technical rules and thus within the scope of this regulation.
Whereas the existence of conformity assessment procedures (or prior authorisation procedures in line with ECJ rulings) do not constitute a technical rule, all testing and test methods and certificates are technical rules and thus within the scope of this regulation.
It is essential to avoid unjustified additional testing of products in the Member State of destination with the means of this regulation.
It is essential to avoid unjustified additional testing of products in the Member State of destination with the means of this regulation.
In the exclusions from the scope of this regulation the Rapporteur sees Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 unnecessary as Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 already ensures that dangerous food or feed can be withdrawn from the market.
In the exclusions from the scope of this regulation the Rapporteur sees Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 unnecessary as Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 already ensures that dangerous food or feed can be withdrawn from the market.
However, exclusion of Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 would enable Member states to withdraw products which do not comply with their own national legislation from the market without needing to apply the principle of mutual recognition.
However, exclusion of Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 would enable Member states to withdraw products which do not comply with their own national legislation from the market without needing to apply the principle of mutual recognition.
Procedure for the application of a technical rule of the Member State of destination.
Procedure for the application of a technical rule of the Member State of destination.
(Chapter 2)
(Chapter 2)
Article 3a (new)
Article 3a (new)
The Rapporteur sees that Article 4 of this regulation depicts a culmination of regular market surveillance activities.
The Rapporteur sees that Article 4 of this regulation depicts a culmination of regular market surveillance activities.
Normally before that point of culmination the economic operator and the competent authority of the Member State engage into a market surveillance dialogue.
Normally before that point of culmination the economic operator and the competent authority of the Member State engage into a market surveillance dialogue.
The Rapporteur deems necessary to clarify that during this dialogue the economic operator needs to provide information about the provisions under which the product has been marketed in another Member State.
The Rapporteur deems necessary to clarify that during this dialogue the economic operator needs to provide information about the provisions under which the product has been marketed in another Member State.
In order to give stronger certainty to the economic operator in the planning of its activities, the Rapporteur has introduced a deadline of 20 days counting from the expiry of the deadline for receipt of comments from the economic operator.
In order to give stronger certainty to the economic operator in the planning of its activities, the Rapporteur has introduced a deadline of 20 days counting from the expiry of the deadline for receipt of comments from the economic operator.
Thus, the economic operator will have at least 20 days to react to the notice.
Thus, the economic operator will have at least 20 days to react to the notice.
After these, the Member State still holds a period of 20 working days to come up with its final decision taking into account the comments of the economic operator.
After these, the Member State still holds a period of 20 working days to come up with its final decision taking into account the comments of the economic operator.
Whatever the final decision of the Member State, the economic operator can plan its activities with more certainty concerning the timing of this decision.
Whatever the final decision of the Member State, the economic operator can plan its activities with more certainty concerning the timing of this decision.
If no final decision is issued by the Member State, the product is deemed to be legally on the market of that Member State.
If no final decision is issued by the Member State, the product is deemed to be legally on the market of that Member State.
Article 4a (new)
Article 4a (new)
By default the product being observed within the procedures of this regulation remains on the market of the Member State of destination throughout the procedures until the final decision is issued by the Member State.
By default the product being observed within the procedures of this regulation remains on the market of the Member State of destination throughout the procedures until the final decision is issued by the Member State.
This new article states that the Member State can temporarily withdraw from the market a dangerous product or a product subject to a total ban on grounds of public morality or security.
This new article states that the Member State can temporarily withdraw from the market a dangerous product or a product subject to a total ban on grounds of public morality or security.
The withdrawal is, however, to be considered as an interim measure.
The withdrawal is, however, to be considered as an interim measure.
The Member State needs still to show scientific evidence and take into account the comments of economic operator while issuing the final decision.
The Member State needs still to show scientific evidence and take into account the comments of economic operator while issuing the final decision.
Thus the final decision can be opposite to the interim measure of withdrawal from the market.
Thus the final decision can be opposite to the interim measure of withdrawal from the market.
In this article the Rapporteur has seeks to clarify to whom the notice and decision done by the Member State should be sent.
In this article the Rapporteur has seeks to clarify to whom the notice and decision done by the Member State should be sent.
To give greater coherence to Chapter 2, the Rapporteur includes the text of Article 6 to the Paragraph 2 of Article 4.
To give greater coherence to Chapter 2, the Rapporteur includes the text of Article 6 to the Paragraph 2 of Article 4.
Product Contact Points (Chapter 3)
Product Contact Points (Chapter 3)
Articles 7 and 8
Articles 7 and 8
The Rapporteur amends these two articles to clarify that the Product contact points should:
The Rapporteur amends these two articles to clarify that the Product contact points should:
- provide first and foremost information on the principle of mutual recognition and the subsequent rights of the economic operators and of the Member States.
- provide first and foremost information on the principle of mutual recognition and the subsequent rights of the economic operators and of the Member States.
- serve as helpdesks providing practical (but by no means legal) assistance on the implementation of the principal of mutual recognition.
- serve as helpdesks providing practical (but by no means legal) assistance on the implementation of the principal of mutual recognition.
- provide information both to the economic operators as well as to the competent authorities of the Member States.
- provide information both to the economic operators as well as to the competent authorities of the Member States.
- liaise with one another across countries to form an efficient network of information.
- liaise with one another across countries to form an efficient network of information.
Final Provisions (Charter 4)
Final Provisions (Charter 4)
The Rapporteur believes that the term «upon its request» creates legal uncertainty for Member States, which cannot know when exactly they will need to fulfil their reporting obligations.
The Rapporteur believes that the term «upon its request» creates legal uncertainty for Member States, which cannot know when exactly they will need to fulfil their reporting obligations.
Hence, the Rapporteur introduces a yearly reporting obligation to Member States.
Hence, the Rapporteur introduces a yearly reporting obligation to Member States.
This would further ensure, that the Commission is regularly informed about the application of this regulation in the Member States.
This would further ensure, that the Commission is regularly informed about the application of this regulation in the Member States.
The Commission shall also analyse these reports and act upon infringements.
The Commission shall also analyse these reports and act upon infringements.
In order to raise awareness on the principle of mutual recognition and to give further guidance to economic operators on the areas where the principle applies, the Rapporteur deems necessary for the Commission to publish an indicative list of products falling under the scope of this regulation.
In order to raise awareness on the principle of mutual recognition and to give further guidance to economic operators on the areas where the principle applies, the Rapporteur deems necessary for the Commission to publish an indicative list of products falling under the scope of this regulation.
The list would by no means even attempt to be exhaustive and would serve merely as an indication through examples.
The list would by no means even attempt to be exhaustive and would serve merely as an indication through examples.
Article 13
Article 13
The Rapporteur considers that the Member States need to be given six months time to set up the Product Contact Points upon entry into force of the regulation.
The Rapporteur considers that the Member States need to be given six months time to set up the Product Contact Points upon entry into force of the regulation.
The regulation itself, however should enter into force within 20 days of its publishing.
The regulation itself, however should enter into force within 20 days of its publishing.
This would give the economic operator the possibility to use mutual recognition in a more efficient manner from the beginning on be it then even without the assistance of Product Contact Points in the first six months.
This would give the economic operator the possibility to use mutual recognition in a more efficient manner from the beginning on be it then even without the assistance of Product Contact Points in the first six months.
относно предложението за регламент на Европейския парламент и на Съвета относно установяване на процедурите, свързани с прилагането на някои национални технически правила за продукти, законно продавани на пазара в други държави -членки, и за отмяна на Решение 3052/95/EО
on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down procedures relating to the application of certain national technical rules to products lawfully marketed in another Member State and repealing Decision 3052/95/EC
The free movement of goods is one of the four basic freedoms on which the European Union is founded.
The free movement of goods is one of the four basic freedoms on which the European Union is founded.
The Union has succeeded in achieving this freedom by, in particular, abolishing customs duties and through other measures such as harmonising technical requirements on certain categories of products.
The Union has succeeded in achieving this freedom by, in particular, abolishing customs duties and through other measures such as harmonising technical requirements on certain categories of products.
Nevertheless, there are still a number of products whose technical parameters have not been harmonised at EU level.
Nevertheless, there are still a number of products whose technical parameters have not been harmonised at EU level.
This has allowed Member States to impose requirements on such products in their own legislation.
This has allowed Member States to impose requirements on such products in their own legislation.
However, this practice has created significant and costly administrative obstacles for traders, who have had to go through additional administrative procedures and adapt their products in the non-harmonised field in order to export them to other Member States.
However, this practice has created significant and costly administrative obstacles for traders, who have had to go through additional administrative procedures and adapt their products in the non-harmonised field in order to export them to other Member States.
In a number of cases, this has led to traders deciding not to export their products to certain countries.
In a number of cases, this has led to traders deciding not to export their products to certain countries.
In 1979, a solution was found by the European Court of Justice, which, in its judgment on the ‘Cassis de Dijon’ case, established a ‘principle of mutual recognition’ on the basis of the EC Treaty.
In 1979, a solution was found by the European Court of Justice, which, in its judgment on the ‘Cassis de Dijon’ case, established a ‘principle of mutual recognition’ on the basis of the EC Treaty.
According to this principle, goods produced or placed on the market in one Member State may have access to the market of another Member State even if they do not entirely fulfil the relevant national requirements.
According to this principle, goods produced or placed on the market in one Member State may have access to the market of another Member State even if they do not entirely fulfil the relevant national requirements.
This approach is perfectly understandable because it can be assumed that the public interest, e.g. protection of health or of the environment, is safeguarded in a similar way in the different Member States.
This approach is perfectly understandable because it can be assumed that the public interest, e.g. protection of health or of the environment, is safeguarded in a similar way in the different Member States.
A Member State may restrict access to its market only when it can demonstrate that the public interest is threatened.
A Member State may restrict access to its market only when it can demonstrate that the public interest is threatened.
For clarification, it should be pointed out that the principle of mutual recognition does not apply to non-quality products that are immediately dangerous or harmful to consumers.
For clarification, it should be pointed out that the principle of mutual recognition does not apply to non-quality products that are immediately dangerous or harmful to consumers.
Pursuant to Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety, such products may be withdrawn from the market immediately and information on their incidence communicated by the national authorities to other Member States through the Community Rapid Information System (RAPEX).
Pursuant to Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety, such products may be withdrawn from the market immediately and information on their incidence communicated by the national authorities to other Member States through the Community Rapid Information System (RAPEX).
However, according to information provided by the Member States and the Commission, the situation, even after 25 years of application of the principle of mutual recognition in the EU, is unsatisfactory.
However, according to information provided by the Member States and the Commission, the situation, even after 25 years of application of the principle of mutual recognition in the EU, is unsatisfactory.
It is common practice for national authorities in the Member States to request that traders adapt their products to local rules and undergo costly and time-consuming processes, such as subjecting products to local checks, although in the majority of cases this contravenes European law.
It is common practice for national authorities in the Member States to request that traders adapt their products to local rules and undergo costly and time-consuming processes, such as subjecting products to local checks, although in the majority of cases this contravenes European law.
That is why the Commission has come forward with a draft regulation intended to increase legal certainty for traders – and for national authorities themselves – by setting clear rules on mutual recognition.
That is why the Commission has come forward with a draft regulation intended to increase legal certainty for traders – and for national authorities themselves – by setting clear rules on mutual recognition.
The draft regulation contains several key aspects:
The draft regulation contains several key aspects:
- a compulsory procedure for national authorities in the event that they decide not to apply the principle of mutual recognition but instead to restrict the movement of a product from another Member State onto their market;
- a compulsory procedure for national authorities in the event that they decide not to apply the principle of mutual recognition but instead to restrict the movement of a product from another Member State onto their market;
- sufficient time for observations to traders to be acted upon before a final written decision is issued by the national authority;
- sufficient time for observations to traders to be acted upon before a final written decision is issued by the national authority;
- concerning the information submitted by the trader, the national authority must justify its final decision in writing;
- concerning the information submitted by the trader, the national authority must justify its final decision in writing;
- the national authority also bears the burden of proof as to why it deems it necessary to restrict access of a product from another Member State to its market and why a special national rule needs to be applied;
- the national authority also bears the burden of proof as to why it deems it necessary to restrict access of a product from another Member State to its market and why a special national rule needs to be applied;
- the trader can also appeal against such a decision in court;
- the trader can also appeal against such a decision in court;
- an important part of the proposal is the creation of contact and information points in individual EU Member States from whom both national authorities and traders can request information on specific products.
- an important part of the proposal is the creation of contact and information points in individual EU Member States from whom both national authorities and traders can request information on specific products.