Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-18-Speech-4-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081218.3.4-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, this is an initiative by Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs that aims to achieve recognition of European authentic acts.
Thirdly, the act cannot produce an effect that goes beyond that which is recognised in its country of origin. That is to say, if an act is merely probative in its country of origin, it cannot be considered an enforceable act.
I would say that these three factors are fundamental: firstly, the person authorising the act must have the status of a public official; secondly, the act is constitutive in nature and does not merely certify a signature; and thirdly, it must not produce effects other than those it would produce in its country of origin.
One area that very clearly needs to be excluded is all matters relating to property law. The law on immovable property appears to be closely tied to the land, to the place where the property is located. The possibility for transfers in this field is therefore limited by the existence of public registers and the fact that each country has strict legislation imposing special requirements in this area.
I hope the Commission will consider this proposal and will be able to submit an initiative. Specifically, the relevant legal bases are Article 65(a) and the second indent of Article 67(5) of the EC Treaty.
I believe that the legal basis is adequate and that this kind of initiative would facilitate legal relations between citizens and, above all, would improve their lives.
The difficulty that the Commission can and will raise is the problem of the diversity of our legal systems, but I think this is a matter that we will have time to discuss at a later stage, once the Commission has submitted its proposal.
This initiative of Parliament calls on the Commission to adopt the measures that it considers appropriate. It is based on the Hague Programme, namely the recognition not only of judicial decisions but also of authentic acts.
The purpose of this initiative is to facilitate the position of consumers within the European Union.
The formalities required for recognising such acts are both expensive and time-consuming.
It seems we should therefore facilitate the movement or recognition of such authentic acts so that whenever there is a cross-border formality, such as a marriage, a contract or something similar, it is not necessary to have to go through cumbersome procedures.
The difficulty that this report may present is the nature of the European authentic act or public document itself, which is recognised in most of the countries in the European Union but not in others.
There are countries where the system of the European authentic act issued by a public official does not exist. Instead there are simple private documents legalised by a notary public, although the nature of the document does not vary.
The precedent for this proposal is the Unibank judgment by the European Court of Justice, which laid down a number of requirements for the recognition of authentic acts. In specific terms, the first requirement was that public officials should issue them. In other words, the person authenticating the act must in some way be a public official, a position that does not exist in some EU countries, which therefore do not have this ability.
Secondly, the act must ensure that the will of the parties is appropriate to the achievement of particular legal purposes. The notarial act, under continental law at least, has a certain constituent character in that the parties express their will in it, but it is the notarial officer who performs the act."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples