Tadeusz ZWIEFKA
Constituencies
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31
Show earlier Constituencies...
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
Groups
-
PPE
Member of the Bureau
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
2009/07/24 - 9999/12/31
Show earlier groups...
-
PPE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
2009/07/14 - 2009/07/23
-
PPE-DE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
-
PPE-DE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
Committees
| Role | Committee | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Committee on Legal Affairs | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
| Member of | Special committee on organised crime, corruption and money laundering | 2012/03/28 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Committee on Constitutional Affairs | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier commitees...
Delegations
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly | 2009/09/16 | 9999/12/31 |
| Member of | Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee | 2009/09/16 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees | 2009/09/16 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier delegations...
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees | 2004/09/15 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee | 2005/03/31 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly | 2007/02/13 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries | 2007/03/14 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with Belarus | 2008/01/09 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries | 2005/03/31 | 2007/03/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee | 2005/03/31 | 2006/12/31 |
| Member of | Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees | 2004/09/15 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries | 2005/03/31 | 2007/03/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee | 2005/03/31 | 2006/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee | 2005/03/31 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly | 2007/02/13 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries | 2007/03/14 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with Belarus | 2008/01/09 | 2009/07/13 |
Contact
Online
- [javascript protected email address]
Brussels
- Phone
- +322 28 45258
- Fax
- +322 28 49258
- Office
- Bât. Altiero Spinelli 14E169
- Full Address
-
- City
- Bruxelles/Brussel
- Zip
- B-1047
- Street
- 60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60
Strasbourg
- Phone
- +333 88 1 75258
- Fax
- +333 88 1 79258
- Office
- Bât. Louise Weiss T11086
- Full Address
-
- City
- Strasbourg
- Zip
- CS 91024 - F-67070
- Street
- 1, avenue du Président Robert Schuman
Postal
- Parlament Europejski
- Rue Wiertz
- Altiero Spinelli 14E169
- B-1047 Bruksela
Rapporteur
| Responsible | 2012/2326(IMM) | Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity of Hans-Peter Martin |
| Responsible | 2012/2239(IMM) | Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity of Ewald Stadler |
| Responsible | 2012/2101(INI) | Improving access to justice: legal aid in cross-border civil and commercial disputes |
| Opinion | 2012/0193(COD) | Fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law |
| Responsible | 2011/2104(IMM) | Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity of Hans-Peter Martin |
| Responsible | 2011/2057(IMM) | Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity of Georgios Toussas |
| Shadow | 2011/0902(COD) | EU Civil Service Tribunal: temporary judges |
| Shadow | 2011/0901B(COD) | Court of Justice: number of judges at the General Court (amend. Statute) |
| Shadow | 2011/0901(COD) | Court of Justice: statute (amend. Protocol and Annex I) |
| Opinion | 2011/0432(CNS) | Consular protection for citizens of the Union abroad |
| Responsible | 2010/0383(COD) | Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. Recast |
| Responsible | 2010/0067(CNS) | Enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation. Implementing rules. Council Regulation |
| Responsible | 2010/0066(NLE) | Enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation. Council Decision |
| Opinion | 2009/2142(INI) | Better lawmaking - 15th annual report from the Commission pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality |
| Responsible | 2009/2140(INI) | Implementation and review of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I) |
| Responsible | 2009/2055(IMM) | Request for the defence of parliamentary immunity of Tobias Pflüger |
| Opinion | 2008/2098(INI) | European Job Mobility Action Plan (2007-2010) |
| Opinion | 2008/2085(INI) | Challenges to collective agreements in the EU |
| Opinion | 2008/0266(CNS) | Member State/third country bilateral agreements: judgments and decisions in matrimonial matters, parental responsibility and maintenance obligations |
| Responsible | 2008/0259(COD) | Member State/third country bilateral agreements: applicable law in contractual and non-contractual obligations for sectoral matters |
| Opinion | 2007/2209(INI) | Common principles on flexicurity |
Born
1954/12/28 Tuchola- Master's in law, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (1979).
- Legal adviser to the Special Machine Tools Factory in Poznań (1979-1981). Reporter for TVP Poznań; editor-in-chief of TVP Poznań local programming; presenter of the 'Wiadomości' news programme on TVP 1; manager of TVP Szczecin; editor and presenter of 'W centrum uwagi' on TVP 1 (1982-1998). Marketing director, 'Sunset Suits' (1998-2000). Telewizja Polska SA - editor and presenter of 'Telekurier' on TVP 3 (2000-2004).
- Member of the Civic Platform National Executive (2004).
- Member of the European Parliament (2004-2009).
- Member of the Board of the Hipolit Cegielski Society. Spokesman for 'Stowarzyszenie Pomocy Mieszkaniowej dla Sierot', an association providing housing assistance to orphans.
- Bronze Cross of Merit of the Republic of Poland. Commander's Cross of the Order of St Stanislas.
Amendments
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 14 |
2008/0196(COD) Consumer rights (amend. Directives 93/13/EEC and 1999/44/EC; repeal. Directives 85/577/EEC and 97/7/EC)
2010/10/13
JURI
14 amendments...
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1.
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) have the lack of conformity remedied by repair or replacement
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b (b)
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 3.
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 4 – introductory part 4.
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) the
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new) (aa) the trader has refused expressively or by concludent behaviour to remedy the lack of conformity
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 4 – point c (c) the trader has
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 4 – point d (d) the same defect has reappeared
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 5 5. The significant inconvenience for the consumer and the reasonable time needed for the trader to remedy the lack of conformity shall be assessed taking into account the nature of the goods
Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. The consumer shall not be entitled to have the sales contract rescinded if the lack of conformity is minor.
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a directive Article 26 – paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Member States may adopt or maintain provisions of national law giving consumers, in the event of lack of conformity, a free choice from among the remedies referred to in paragraph 1, in order to ensure a higher level of protection for consumers. These measures must be essential in order to protect consumers appropriately, and must be proportionate and effective.
source: PE-450.756
|
| 3 |
2008/0238(COD) Organ transplantation: standards of quality and safety of human organs intended for transplantation
2010/12/01
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 8 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 a (new) (16a) Combating organ trafficking should not remain the responsibility of the European Union alone. Member States should also take measures to that end, including reducing demand, promoting organ donation more effectively, maintaining strict legislation with regard to live donors, guaranteeing transparency of national registers and waiting lists, establishing the legal responsibility of the medical profession for tracking irregularities, and sharing information.
Amendment 9 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 - paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Member States shall intensify their cooperation under the auspices of Interpol and Europol in order to address the problem of trafficking in organs more effectively.
Amendment 10 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 - paragraph 3 d (new) 3d. Member States shall, in order to minimise the risk of organ trafficking in the European Union, reduce demand, promote organ donation more effectively, maintain strict legislation with regard to live unrelated donors, guarantee transparency of national registers and waiting lists, establish the legal responsibility of the medical profession for tracking irregularities, and share information.
source: PE-438.152
|
| 3 |
2009/0157(COD) Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters: international succession and creation of a European Certificate of Succession
2011/01/07
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new) The application of the law applicable to the succession under paragraph 1 may not have the result of completely depriving members of the deceased's family of the protection afforded to them by the mandatory provisions of the law of the State whose nationality the deceased possessed at the time of death, concerning the reserve, the reserved share or equivalent measures.
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 45 – paragraph 1 1. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the bilateral or multilateral conventions to which one or more Member States are party at the time of adoption of this Regulation and which relate to the subjects covered by this Regulation
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 45 a (new) source: PE-464.765
|
| 3 |
2009/2104(INI) Report on the Commission communication: Action Plan on organ donation and transplantation (2009-2015): strengthened cooperation between Member States
2010/12/01
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Underlines that organ trafficking, transplant commercialism and transplant tourism violate the principles of equity, justice and respect for human rights, and undermine the ethics of altruistic donation.
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Stresses that the Member States should intensify their cooperation under the auspices of Interpol and Europol in order to address the problem of trafficking in organs more effectively.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Believes that combating organ trafficking should not remain the responsibility of the European Union alone. Member States should also take measures to that end, including reducing demand, promoting organ donation more effectively, maintaining strict legislation in regard to live unrelated donors, guaranteeing transparency of national registers and waiting lists, establishing the legal responsibility of the medical profession for tracking irregularities, and sharing information.
source: PE-438.151
|
| 19 |
2009/2140(INI) Implementation and review of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I)
2010/12/05
JURI
19 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas abolition of exequatur
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas the rules of the New York Convention are minimum rules and the law of the Contracting States may be more favourable to arbitral competence and arbitration awards,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I b (new) Ib. whereas, moreover, a rule providing that the courts of the Member State of the seat of the arbitration should have exclusive jurisdiction could give rise to considerable perturbations,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I c (new) Ic. whereas it appears from the intense debate raised by the proposal to create an exclusive head of jurisdiction for court proceedings supporting arbitration in the civil courts of the Member States that the Member States have not reached a common position thereon and that it would be counterproductive, having regard to world competition in this area, to try to force their hand,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I d (new) Id. whereas the various national procedural devices developed to protect arbitral jurisdiction (anti-suit injunctions so long as they are in conformity with free movement of persons and fundamental rights, declaration of validity of an arbitration clause, grant of damages for breach of an arbitration clause, the negative effect of the 'Kompetenz- Kompetenz principle', etc. must continue to be available and the effect of such procedures and the ensuing court decisions in the other Member States must be left to the law of those Member States as was the position prior to the judgment in West Tankers,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas third parties may be bound by a choice-of-court agreement (for instance in a bill of lading) to which they have not specifically assented and that this may adversely affect their access to justice and be manifestly unfair and whereas, therefore, the effect of choice-of-court agreements in respect of third parties needs to be dealt with in a specific provision of the Regulation,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L a (new) La. whereas, as regards provisional measures, the Denilauer case-law should be clarified by making it clear that ex parte measures can be recognised and enforced on the basis of the Regulation provided that the defendant has had the opportunity to contest them,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L b (new) Lb. whereas it is unclear to what extent protective orders aimed at obtaining information and evidence are excluded from the scope of Article 31 of the Regulation,
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Calls for the requirement for exequatur to be abolished, but considers that this must be balanced by stringent safeguards designed to protect the rights of the
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Considers that the Regulation should contain a new provision dealing with the opposability of choice-of-court agreements against third parties; takes the view that such provision could provide that a person who is not a party to the contract will be bound by an exclusive choice-of-court agreement concluded in accordance with the Regulation only if: (a) that agreement is contained in a written document or electronic record; (b) that person is given timely and adequate notice of the court where the action shall be brought; (c) in contracts for carriage of goods, the chosen court is (i) the domicile of the carrier; (ii) the place of receipt agreed in the contract of carriage; (iii) the place of delivery agreed in the contract of carriage, or (iv) the port where the goods are initially loaded on a ship or the port where the goods are finally discharged from a ship. It should further be provided that, in all other cases, the third party may bring an action before the court otherwise competent under the Regulation if it appears that holding that party to the chosen forum would be blatantly unfair;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) Provisional measures 20a. Considers that, in order to ensure better access to justice, orders aimed at obtaining information and evidence or at preserving evidence should be covered by the notion of provisional and protective measures;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Believes that the Regulation should establish jurisdiction for such measures at the courts of the Member State where the information or evidence sought is located, in addition to the jurisdiction of the courts having jurisdiction with respect to the substance;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Finds that "provisional, including protective measures" should be defined in a recital in the terms used in the St Paul Dairy case;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 d (new) 20d. Considers that the distinction drawn in Van Uden between cases in which the court granting the measure has jurisdiction over the substance of the case and cases in which it does not, should be replaced by a test based on the question of whether measures are sought in support of proceedings issued or to be issued in that Member State or a non-Member State (in which case the restrictions set out in Article 31 should not apply) or in support of proceedings in another Member State (in which case the Article 31 restrictions should apply);
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 e (new) 20e. Urges, that a recital be introduced, in order to overcome the difficulties posed by the requirement recognised in Van Uden for a “real connecting link” to the territorial jurisdiction of the Member State court granting such a measure, to make it clear that in deciding whether to grant, renew, modify or discharge a provisional measure granted in support of proceedings in another Member State, Member State courts should take into account all of the circumstances, including (i) any statement by the Member State court seised of the main dispute with respect to the measure in question or measures of the same kind, (ii) whether there is a real connecting link between the measure sought and the territory of the Member State in which it is sought, and (iii) the likely impact of the measure on proceedings pending or to be issued in another Member State;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 f (new) 20f. Rejects the Commission's idea that the court seised of the main proceedings should be able to discharge, modify or adapt provisional measures granted by a court from another Member State since this would not be in the spirit of the principle of mutual trust established by the Regulation; considers, moreover, that it is unclear on what basis a court could review a decision made by a court in a different jurisdiction and which law would apply in these circumstances, and that this could give rise to real practical problems, for example with regard to costs;
source: PE-441.266
|
| 11 |
2009/2142(INI) Better lawmaking - 15th annual report from the Commission pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality
2010/11/05
JURI
11 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 18 a (new) – having regard to the Commission proposal for a regulation on the citizens' initiative (COM(2010)0119),
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Considers that the improvement of interinstitutional cooperation in this vast area requires a revision of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Lawmaking of 2003; draws attention, in this regard, to the relevant paragraphs of its resolution of 9 February 2010 on the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission, especially to the joint commitment of the two institutions to agree on key changes in preparation for future negotiations with the Council of Ministers on an adaptation of the Agreement on Better Law-Making to the new provisions of the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the closer involvement of national parliaments in the European legislative process, in particular in the process of verifying the compliance of legislative proposals with the principle of subsidiarity; underlines the need for national parliaments to observe the eight- week period in which to make their opinions known;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Welcomes in particular that the Commission's new Impact Assessment Guidelines foresee an analysis of the impact of forthcoming legislation and administrative initiatives on SMEs (SME test) and that the results of this analysis are taken into account when proposals are drafted; emphasises that the systematic application of the SME test in the Commission's impact assessment is an important element in the implementation of the Small Business Act, thus considerably contributing to a SME - friendly regulatory environment; calls on the Member States to apply the SME test at national level;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Emphasises the importance of reducing the costs for businesses operating
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30 a. encourages the Commission to extend the Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the EU to new priority areas and other legislative acts, on the basis of the consultation of affected stakeholders and the ex-post assessment of existing legislation; calls on the Commission to continue this Action Programme beyond 2012;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Warns against abandoning necessary legislation
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Stresses at the same time that soft law should be applied with the greatest of care and on a duly justified basis, without undermining legal certainty and the clarity of existing legislation, and after consultation of Parliament as underlined in its resolution on a revised Framework Agreement;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Points, furthermore, to a range of other institutional changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty that will affect lawmaking in the European Union; emphasises in particular the importance of the European citizens" initiative and welcomes the Commission's
source: PE-441.225
|
| 1 |
2010/0067(CNS) Enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation. Implementing rules. Council Regulation
2010/11/15
JURI
1 amendments...
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 8 a (new) (8a) The Commission and the Member States participating in enhanced cooperation undertake, pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 328(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to ensure that they promote participation in the enhanced cooperation by as many Member States as possible.
source: PE-452.610
|
| 7 |
2010/0383(COD) Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. Recast
2011/10/19
JURI
7 amendments...
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 11 Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d (d) arbitration
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 32 – paragraph 2 2. With
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Where the jurisdiction of the court designated in the agreement is established, any court of another Member State which is also seised shall decline jurisdiction in favour of that court.
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 32 – paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Paragraphs 2 and 3 shall not apply to agreements governed by Sections 3, 4 and 5 when the policyholder, the insured, the injured party or a beneficiary of the contract of insurance, the consumer or the employee is the claimant.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 44 Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 46 – paragraph 1 1.
source: PE-473.813
|
| 2 |
2010/2080(INI) Civil law, commercial law, family law and private international law aspects of the Action plan implementing the Stockholm Programme
2010/06/09
JURI
2 amendments...
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14a (new) 14a. Urges the Commission to use its best endeavours at the Hague Conference to revive the project for an international judgments convention; considers that the Commission could make a start with wide- ranging consultations, while informing and involving Parliament, on whether the rules of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001[1]should be given reflexive effect in order to incentivise other countries, particularly the United States, to resume negotiations; takes the view that it would be premature and ill-advised to contemplate giving the rules of that regulation reflexive effect until it is sufficiently clear that the attempts to restart the negotiations in the Hague have failed and it appears from the consultations and studies carried out that this move would have positive benefits and advantages for citizens, business and practitioners in the EU; [1] Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, OJ L 12 , 16/01/2001, p. 1.
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14b (new) 14b. Observes that the Commission has set up a working group on arbitration; cautions the Commission against adopting any legislative initiative in this area without holding open consultations while involving the European Parliament to the full; calls on the Commission to ensure that a representative of the competent parliamentary committee is invited to take part in all such working groups and considers that, without detracting from the Commission's right of initiative, the European Parliament should have the right to nominate a member or members of such working groups in order to ensure that they are truly representative;
source: PE-445.987
|
| 2 |
2011/0093(COD) Enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection: implementation
2011/10/27
JURI
2 amendments...
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 18 (18) Renewal fees should be paid to the European Patent Organisation.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 16 – paragraph 1 1. The
source: PE-475.775
|
| 3 |
2011/0154(COD) Judicial cooperation in criminal matters: right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and right to communicate upon arrest
2011/11/17
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 4. The lawyer shall have the right to
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part Member States shall not derogate from any of the provisions of this Directive save, in exceptional circumstances, from Article 3, Article 4
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that statements made by the suspect or accused person
source: PE-475.965
|
| 3 |
2011/0302(COD) Connecting Europe Facility
2012/09/20
REGI
2 amendments...
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 13 (13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10 billion) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR 10 000 000 000 shall be transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent
source: PE-496.462
2012/10/17
TRAN, ITRE
1 amendments...
Amendment 601 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex – Part I – point 1 – introductory part Helsinki – Tallinn – Riga – Kaunas – Warszawa – Katowice Gdynia – Katowice Katowice – Ostrava – Brno – Wien Katowice – Žilina – Bratislava – Wien Wien – Graz – Klagenfurt – Villach – Udine – Venezia – Bologna – Ravenna Graz – Ljubljana – Koper/Trieste Szczecin/Świnoujście - Poznań/Zielona Góra - Wrocław - Ostrava
source: PE-497.891
|
| 10 |
2011/0359(COD) Statutory audit of public-interest entities: specific requirements
2012/09/11
JURI
10 amendments...
Amendment 570 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The public-interest entity may renew this engagement
Amendment 577 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 589 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 2 Amendment 610 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 3 Amendment 619 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 The statutory auditor or audit firm shall establish an appropriate gradual rotation mechanism with regard to the key audit most senior person
Amendment 622 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 624 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 625 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 629 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 source: PE-500.464
|
| 1 |
2011/0369(COD) Justice Programme 2014-2020
2012/09/07
LIBE, JURI
1 amendments...
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. VAT which is not recoverable under national VAT legislation is eligible in the case of action grants and operating grants.
source: PE-492.688
|
| 3 |
2011/0455(COD) Staff Regulations of European Union officials: amendment of the Regulations
2012/03/20
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 8 Staff Regulations Article 27 – paragraph 2 The principle of the equality of Union's citizens shall allow each institution to adopt corrective measures following the observation of a long lasting and significant imbalance between nationalities among officials, taking into account the breakdown into each category and into each grade separately, which is not justified by objective criteria. These corrective measures shall never result in recruitment criteria other than those based on merit. Before such corrective measures are adopted, the appointing authority of the institution concerned shall adopt general provisions for giving effect to this paragraph in accordance with Article 110.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 9 Staff Regulations Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b 9. In Article 29
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 55 – point i Staff Regulations Annex XIII – Article 31 source: PE-483.851
|
| 5 |
2011/0901(COD) Court of Justice: statute (amend. Protocol and Annex I)
2011/11/11
AFCO
3 amendments...
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new) 7a. The following paragraph shall be added to Article 48: The Council shall draw up an asymmetrical rotation list for the election of the additional Judges. Six of the 12 Judges' posts shall be allocated to the biggest Member States on a permanent basis, the remaining ones shall be allocated to the remaining Member States on a rotating basis.
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new) 7b. The following paragraph shall be added to Article 48: Member States shall be represented by at least one Judge but by no more than two Judges of their nationality.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 The Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with Article 257 TFEU, may attach temporary Judges to the specialised courts in order to cover the absence of Judges who, while not suffering from disablement deemed to be total, are prevented from participating in judicial business for an extended period of time. In that event, the Parliament and the Council shall lay down the conditions under which the temporary Judges shall be appointed, their rights and duties, the detailed rules governing the performance of their duties and the circumstances in which they shall cease to perform those duties. In order to guarantee the uncompromised authority of the Court's judgments, those provisions shall ensure, moreover, that the temporary Judges enjoy the same rights regarding their professional activities as permanent Judges.
source: PE-475.880
2012/12/01
JURI
2 amendments...
Amendment 21 #
Draft regulation Article 1 – point -1 (new) Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new) -1. The following paragraph shall be added to Article 9: 'The Court of Justice shall include at least one Judge but not more than two Judges per Member State'
Amendment 24 #
Draft regulation Article 1 – point 7 a (new) 7a. The following Article 48a shall be inserted: 'Article 48a The Council shall draw up an asymmetrical rotation list for the appointment of the Judges. At all times, there shall be two Judges from each of the six most populous Member States. The rotation list shall determine when each of the remaining Member States is entitled to nominate a second Judge.'
source: PE-478.661
|
| 8 |
2011/2006(INI) Insolvency proceedings in the context of EU company law
2011/07/13
JURI
8 amendments...
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 1 – point 1.1 – indent 1 a (new) – insolvency proceedings are initiated in a timely manner in order to allow a rescue of the troubled enterprise;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 1 – point 1.1 – indent 3 – insolvency proceedings can also be opened after the dissolution of a legal entity or of an entity without legal personality, as long as the distribution of the assets has not yet taken place, or in cases where assets are still available;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 1 – point 1.1 – indent 4 – the proceedings can be opened by a court or other competent authority upon a written request of a creditor or the debtor
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 1 – point 1.1 – indent 7 – as far as mandatory filing for bankruptcy by the debtor is concerned, the proceedings must be opened within a period of between one and two months after the cessation of payments if the court has not already initiated preliminary proceedings or other appropriate measures in order to protect the assets;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 1 – point 1.5 – indent 4 a (new) – unimpaired creditors, or parties that are not affected by the plan, should not be entitled to vote on the plan or, at least, should not be able to impede it.
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 2 – point 2.1 The European Parliament considers that the scope of the Insolvency Regulation should be broadened to include insolvency proceedings in which the debtor remains in possession or where a preliminary liquidator has been appointed. Annex A of the Insolvency Regulation should be revised accordingly.
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 2 – point 2.2 The European Parliament considers that the Insolvency Regulation should include a definition of the term ‘centre of main interest’. The European Parliament suggests that the wording of Recital 13 as clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice may be used as a formal definition to be included in Article 2. In any case the term ‘centre of main interest’ should be revised and defined in such a way as to prevent fraudulent forum-shopping.
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Annex – part 2 – point 2.4 a (new) 2.4a Recommendation on certain aspects of avoidance actions The European Parliament considers that Article 13 of the Insolvency Regulation should be reviewed so that it does not encourage cross-border avoidance actions but helps to prevent avoidance actions from succeeding by means of choice-of- law clauses. In any event, the review of the avoidance action rules should take into account the consideration that healthy subsidiaries of an insolvent holding company should not be driven into insolvency due to avoiding actions rather than being sold in the interests of the creditors as a going concern.
source: PE-469.800
|
| 1 |
2011/2037(INI) Audit policy: lessons from the crisis
2011/03/28
JURI
1 amendments...
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Considers th
source: PE-462.588
|
| 5 |
2011/2193(INI) Voluntary and unpaid donation of tissues and cells
2012/11/04
JURI
5 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) A a. whereas Article 3(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union contains a prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain,
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital D a (new) D a. whereas voluntary and unpaid tissue and cell donations contribute to high safety standards for tissues and cells and therefore to the protection of human health,
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Underlines that any commercialisation of human tissue and cells violates the principles of equity, respect for human rights and undermines the ethics of altruistic donation;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to pursue the option of extending the principle that deceased potential donors are presumed to consent to donation provided that they have not stated otherwise during their lifetime; calls, nevertheless, on the Member States to actively promote, regardless of their national systems, the concept of the declaration of consent, as such a declaration is undeniable proof of a potential donor's decision;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise awareness among European citizens of the capacity of voluntary and unpaid tissue and cell donation to address the gap between demand and supply more effectively;
source: PE-486.137
|
| 4 |
2011/2275(INI) 28th annual report on monitoring the application of EU Law (2010)
2012/03/10
JURI
4 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Deplores the absence in the above- mentioned new communication of any reference to EU Pilot, which is, as defined by the Commission itself, a
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates its view that the discretionary power conferred by the Treaties upon the Commission in dealing with the infringement procedure must respect the rule of law, the principle of legal clarity, the requirements of transparency and openness and the principle of proportionality, and that nothing must under any circumstances jeopardise the basic purpose of that power, which is to guarantee the timely and correct application of Union law;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Considers it of the utmost importance that the Commission should make use of this possibility, together with all other possible means of guaranteeing that Member States transpose Union legislation in a timely and correct fashion
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that the national courts play a vital role in applying EU law, and fully supports the EU's efforts to enhance and coordinate judicial training for
source: PE-496.650
|
| 5 |
2011/2308(INI) Environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities
2012/05/06
JURI
5 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Understands shale gas exploration and extraction to refer to any unconventional hydrocarbon exploration and extraction using horizontal drilling and
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5a (new) 5a. Recalls that the Guidance Note Ref. Ares (2011)1339393 dated 12/12/2011 of the Commission, DG Environment, confirms that the Council Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended and as codified by Directive 2011/92/EU, on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (known as the Environmental Impact Assessment or the EIA Directive) sufficiently covers exploration and exploitation of unconventional hydrocarbons; calls on the Member States, the industry and environmental groups to assess the selection criteria of Annex III of the EIA Directive as transposed by the relevant Member State and tailor the selection criteria, if not already covered or required, to the needs of drilling operations using hydraulic fracturing; Recalls that if hydraulic fracturing as technology is being used, such technology is part of the overall conventional and unconventional hydrocarbon exploration and extraction activities, which are covered by the above mentioned EU environmental legislation (see 3) and Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorizations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons; Recalls that hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation uses standards and practices that exceed regulatory requirements, recognizing that regulations and standards are not static but evolve and improve as new information and technologies become available; therefore, the industry develops, in transparency with local regulatory bodies, environmental groups and communities, recommended standards and practices on the basis of generally accepted scientific and engineering principles;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7a (new) Recalls that, when conducting the hydraulic fracturing technology with an average of 2000 – 3000 meters below the groundwater level, there is no direct discharge of pollutants into the groundwater as defined in Article 11(3)(j) juncto Article 2, 32, juncto Article 2, 2° of the Water Framework Directive; Calls on the industry, in transparency with national regulatory bodies, environmental groups and communities, to take measures necessary to prevent any deterioration of the status of all relevant bodies of groundwater, in order to maintain the good groundwater status as defined in the Water Framework Directive and the Groundwater Directive;
source: PE-491.087
|
| 6 |
2012/0011(COD) Personal data protection: processing and free movement of data (General Data Protection Regulation)
2012/11/29
JURI
6 amendments...
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 48 (48) The principles of fair and transparent processing require that the data subject should be informed in particular of the existence of the processing operation and its purposes, how long the data will be stored, or if this is not possible, of the criteria used to determine this period, on the existence of the right of access, rectification or erasure and on the right to lodge a complaint. Where the data are collected from the data subject, the data subject should also be informed whether they are obliged to provide the data and of the consequences, in cases they do not provide such data.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 51 (51) Any person should have the right of access to data which has been collected concerning them, and to exercise this right easily, in order to be aware and verify the lawfulness of the processing. Every data subject should therefore have the right to know and obtain communication in particular for what purposes the data are processed, for what period, or if this is not possible, the criteria used to determine this period, which recipients receive the data, what is the logic of the data that are undergoing the processing and what might be, at least when based on profiling, the consequences of such processing. This right should not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others, including trade secrets or intellectual property and in particular the copyright protecting the software. However, the result of these considerations should not be that all information is refused to the data subject.
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 4 – point 13 (13) ‘main establishment’ means as regards the controller, including a controller that is also a processor, the place of its establishment in the Union where
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. In the event that the data subject withdraws his consent, the controller may refuse to provide further services to the data subject if the processing of the data is vital for the provision of the service or for ensuring that the characteristics of the service are maintained.
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point c c) the period for which the personal data will be stored, or if this is not possible, the criteria used to determine this period;
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d d) the period for which the personal data will be stored, or if this is not possible, the criteria used to determine this period;
source: PE-500.695
|
| 30 |
2012/0061(COD) Posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services: enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC
2013/01/28
JURI
30 amendments...
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) In order to prevent, avoid and combat circumvention and/or abuse of the applicable rules by companies taking improper or fraudulent advantage of the freedom to provide services enshrined in the Treaty and/or the application of Directive 96/71/EC the implementation and monitoring of the notion of posting should be improved and more uniform criteria, facilitating a common interpretation, should be introduced at Union level.
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a) Competent authorities should make an overall assessment of all factual elements in order to determine whether the worker is genuinely posted. If the proof cannot be produced, Member States involved should collaborate closely and without delay in order to choose which law is applicable to the employment contract, basing their decision on the Rome I Regulation.
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) In order to ensure the correct application of, and to monitor compliance with, the substantive rules on the terms and conditions of employment to be respected with regard to posted workers, Member States should apply only certain control measures or administrative formalities to undertakings posting workers for the provision of services.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 (24) In view of the prevalence of subcontracting in the construction sector, and in order to protect posted workers’ rights, it is
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) ‘competent authority’ means
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) ‘requesting authority’ means the competent authority of a Member State which makes a request for assistance, information, notification or recovery concerning a penalty or fine as referred to in Chapter VI;
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) ‘requested authority’ means the competent authority of a Member State to which a request for assistance, information, notification or recovery is made, as referred to in Chapter VI.
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part 1. For the purpose of implementing, applying and enforcing Directive 96/71/EC the competent authorities shall take into account factual elements characterising the activities carried out by an undertaking in the State in which it is established in order to determine whether it genuinely p
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) the place where posted workers are recruited
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d (d) the place where the undertaking performs its
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part Such elements may only include :
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The cooperation of the Member States shall in particular consist in replying without delay to reasoned requests for information and to carry out checks, inspections and investigations from competent authorities with respect to the situations of posting referred to in Article 1 (3) of Directive 96/71/EC, including investigation of any abuses of applicable rules on the posting of workers
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. In the event of difficulty in meeting a request for information or in carrying out checks, inspections or investigations, the Member State in question shall rapidly inform the requesting Member State with a view to finding a solution. In the event of any persisting problems in the exchange of information, the Commission should intervene in order to assist Member States in solving the problem.
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 5. Member States shall supply the information requested by other Member States or the Commission by electronic means as soon as possible and at the latest within 2 weeks from the reception of a request or within one month if the answer requires an on-the-spot inspection.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 A specific urgency mechanism shall be used for special situations where a Member State becomes aware of particular circumstances requiring urgent action. In such circumstances, the information shall be submitted within
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 7 7. Member States shall ensure the confidentiality of the information which they exchange. Information exchanged shall be used only in respect of the matter(s) for which it was requested and in accordance with data protection rules.
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c (c)
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d (d)
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part 1. With respect to the construction activities referred to in the Annex to Directive 96/71/EC, for all posting situations covered by Article 1(3) of Directive 96/71/EC, the Member States
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 2. Member States
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 1. Without prejudice to the means which are or may be provided for in Union legislation, the principles of mutual assistance and recognition as well as the measures and procedures provided for in this
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 2. The requesting authority may, in accordance with the laws, regulations and administrative practices in force in its own Member State, request the competent authority in another Member State to recover a penalty or fine or notify a decision imposing a penalty or a fine
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 a (new) Article 14a Grounds for refusal The competent authorities in the requested Member State may refuse a request for recovery or notification of a decision if the request is incomplete or manifestly does not correspond to the underlying decision or the costs required to recover the penalty/fine are disproportionate in relation to the amount to be recovered.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 1. The
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 a (new) Article 16a Review clause Within three years after the date referred to in Article 20, the Commission shall, in consultation with the Member States, review the application of this Chapter in particular in light of the experiences with and effectiveness of the system of cross- border enforcement of administrative penalties and/or fines with a view to proposing, where appropriate, any necessary amendments or modifications.
source: PE-504.132
|
| 3 |
2012/2044(INI) 20 main concerns of European citizens and business with the functioning of the Single Market
2012/02/05
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, despite the simplification of legislation and the reduction
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Regards effective enforcement as particularly important with regard to Internet sales and welcomes the proposal for online dispute settlement; considers improved information for consumers about their existing rights to be essential; in this respect intends to examine carefully the proposal for a Common European Sales Law that has great potential to make on- line business more accessible and legally predictable to both consumers and businesses, and emphasises that this must guarantee a very high level of consumer protection; at the same time calls for the establishment of ‘standard European template contracts’; considers it important to establish appropriate regulations for digital content;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. In the area of the effective protection of intellectual property, refers to the prevention of brand and product piracy and emphasises that a reasonable balance must always be found between the interests of
source: PE-487.989
|
| 3 |
2012/2101(INI) Improving access to justice: legal aid in cross-border civil and commercial disputes
2013/04/09
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Points out that new technologies and communication tools could be used to enable access to information on legal aid; recommends, therefore, that the Commission and Member States use a wide range of communication channels, including internet-based campaigns and interactive platforms such as the e-Justice portal, as cost-effective ways to reach citizens;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Considers that databases of legal professionals with the sufficient linguistic and comparative law skills to act in cross- border legal aid cases should be established, thus ensuring that legal professionals are appointed who are able to act in such cases; whilst recognising existing cross-border legal databases such as the Find-a-Lawyer platform as examples of good practice in this field, calls for such tools to be developed further with a view to being integrated into a database of legal professionals on the e- Justice portal;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Invites the Commission to submit a proposal for amendment of the directive along the above lines,
source: PE-508.232
|
| 2 |
2012/2135(INI) Development aspects of intellectual property rights on genetic resources: the impact on poverty reduction in developing countries
2012/10/17
JURI
2 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reiterates that, against the background of its recent resolution on the patenting of essential biological processes, excessively broad patent protection in the area of breeding can hamper innovation and progress and become detrimental to small and medium-sized breeders by blocking access to
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the international community to
source: PE-497.985
|
| 3 |
2012/2322(INI) Online gambling in the internal market
2013/03/27
JURI
3 amendments...
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that a single European legislative act, uniformly regulating the entire gambling sector, would not be appropriate owing to subsidiarity concerns but that, in some areas, a coordinated European approach, in addition to national regulation, would clearly provide added value in view of the cross-border nature of online gambling services;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Warns that gambling can lead to dangerous addiction, which is an issue that would need to be addressed in any legislative proposal for the sake of consumers and the integrity of this form of sport;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Takes note of the preparatory work carried out by the Council of Europe in respect of the preliminary draft convention against the manipulation of sport events and encourages Member States to support this valuable initiative;
source: PE-508.061
|
Tadeusz ZWIEFKA on
Activities
Term 7 14.07.2009 / ...
Term 6 20.07.2004 - 13.07.2009
All references link to europarl.euHistory
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| active | changed |
Old
New
True |