Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
REPORT     ***I
PDF 593kWORD 93k
17 July 2018
PE 621.985v02-00 A8-0261/2018

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to the third party effects of assignments of claims

(COM(2018)0096 – C8-0109/2018 – 2018/0044(COD))

Committee on Legal Affairs

Rapporteur: Pavel Svoboda

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to the third party effects of assignments of claims

(COM(2018)0096 – C8-0109/2018 – 2018/0044(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0096),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 81(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0109/2018),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0261/2018),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  The proper functioning of the internal market requires, in order to improve the predictability of the outcome of litigation, certainty as to the law applicable and the free movement of judgments, for the conflict of law rules in the Member States to designate as the applicable law the same national law irrespective of the Member State of the court in which an action is brought.

(3)  The proper functioning of the internal market requires - in order to improve the predictability of the outcome of litigation, legal certainty as to the law applicable and the free movement and recognition of judgments - for the conflict of law rules in the Member States to designate as the applicable law the same national law irrespective of the Member State of the court in which an action is brought.

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11)  Conflict of laws rules governing the third-party (or proprietary) effects of assignments of claims do not currently exist at Union level. These conflict of laws rules are laid down at Member State level, but they are inconsistent and often unclear. In cross-border assignments of claims, the inconsistency of national conflict of laws rules leads to legal uncertainty as to which law applies to the third-party effects of the assignments. The lack of legal certainty creates a legal risk in cross-border assignments of claims which does not exist in domestic assignments as different national substantive rules may be applied depending on the Member State whose courts or authorities assess a dispute as to the legal title over the claims.

(11)  No harmonised set of rules on the conflict of laws governing the third-party effects of assignments of claims currently exist at Union level. These conflict of laws rules are laid down at Member State level, but they are inconsistent - being based on different connecting factors to determine the applicable law - and therefore unclear, especially in those countries where such rules are not governed by separate legislative provisions. In cross-border assignments of claims, the inconsistency of national conflict of laws rules leads to legal uncertainty as to which law applies to the third-party effects of the assignments. The lack of legal certainty creates a legal risk in cross-border assignments of claims which does not exist in domestic assignments as different national substantive rules may be applied depending on the Member State whose courts or authorities assess a dispute as to the legal title over the claims; implicitly, the outcome of a priority conflict as to who owns a claim further to a cross-border assignment will vary, depending on the national law applied.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  If assignees are not aware of the legal risk or choose to ignore it, they may face unexpected financial losses. Uncertainty about who has legal title over the claims assigned on a cross-border basis can have knock-on effects and deepen and prolong the impact of a financial crisis. If assignees decide to mitigate the legal risk by seeking specific legal advice, they will incur higher transaction costs not required for domestic assignments. If assignees are deterred by the legal risk and choose to avoid it, they may forego business opportunities and market integration may be reduced.

(12)  If assignees are not aware of the legal risk or choose to ignore it, they may face unexpected financial losses. Uncertainty about who has legal title over the claims assigned on a cross-border basis can have knock-on effects and deepen and prolong the impact of a financial crisis. If assignees decide to mitigate the legal risk by seeking specific legal advice, they will incur higher transaction costs not required for domestic assignments.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(12a)  This legal risk can also act as a deterrent. Assignees and assignors may choose to avoid it, thereby allowing business opportunities to pass. This lack of clarity does not therefore appear to be in line with the objective of market integration and the principle of free movement of capital enshrined in Articles 63 to 66 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  The objective of this Regulation is to provide legal certainty by laying down common conflict of laws rules designating which national law applies to the third-party effects of assignments of claims.

(13)  The objective of this Regulation is to provide legal certainty by laying down common conflict of laws rules designating which national law applies to the third-party effects of assignments of claims, increasing cross-border claims transactions, so as to encourage cross-border investment in the Union and facilitate access to finance for firms - including small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) - and consumers.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(14a)  This Regulation is not intended to alter the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 regarding the proprietary effect of a voluntary assignment as between assignor and assignee or as between assignee and debtor.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15)  The conflict of laws rules laid down in this Regulation should govern the proprietary effects of assignments of claims as between all parties involved in the assignment (that is, between the assignor and the assignee and between the assignee and the debtor) as well as in respect of third parties (for example, a creditor of the assignor).

(15)  The conflict of laws rules laid down in this Regulation should govern the effects of assignments of claims in respect of third parties, for example, a creditor of the assignor, excluding the debtor.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16)  The claims covered by this Regulation are trade receivables, claims arising from financial instruments as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU on markets in financial instruments44 and cash credited to an account in a credit institution. Financial instruments as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU include securities and derivatives traded on financial markets. While securities are assets, derivatives are contracts which include both rights (or claims) and obligations for the parties to the contract.

(16)  The claims covered by this Regulation include trade receivables, claims arising from financial instruments as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 and cash credited to an account in a credit institution. Financial instruments as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU include securities and derivatives traded on financial markets. While securities are assets, derivatives are contracts which include both rights (or claims) and obligations for the parties to the contract.

___________________

___________________

44 Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU, OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349–496.

44 Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349).

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17)   This Regulation concerns the third-party effects of the assignment of claims. It does not cover the transfer of the contracts (such as derivative contracts), in which both rights (or claims) and obligations are included, or the novation of contracts including such rights and obligations. As this Regulation does not cover the transfer or the novation of contracts, trading in financial instruments, as well as the clearing and the settlement of these instruments, will continue to be governed by the law applicable to contractual obligations as laid down in the Rome I Regulation. This law is normally chosen by the parties to the contract or is designated by non-discretionary rules applicable to financial markets.

(17)  This Regulation concerns the third-party effects of the assignment of claims. In particular, it covers the transfer of the contracts (such as derivative contracts), in which both rights (or claims) and obligations are included, or the novation of contracts including such rights and obligations.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18)  Matters governed by the Financial Collateral Directive44, the Settlement Finality Directive45, the Winding-Up Directive46and the Registry Regulation47should not be affected by this Regulation.

(18)  Matters governed by Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council44, Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 45, Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council46and Commission Regulation (EU) No 389/201347 should not be affected by this Regulation, since the scope of the conflict of laws rules contained in this Regulation and that of the conflict of laws rules contained in those three Directives do not therefore overlap.

_________________

_________________

44 Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements, OJ L 168, 27.6.2002, p. 43–50.

44 Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements (OJ L 168, 27.6.2002, p. 43).

45 Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 1998 on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems, OJ L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45–50.

45 Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 1998 on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems (OJ L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45).

46 Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions, OJ L 125, 5.5.2001, p. 15–23.

46 Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions (OJ L 125, 5.5.2001, p. 15).

47 Commission Regulation (EU) No 389/2013 of 2 May 2013 establishing a Union Registry pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Decisions No 280/2004/EC and No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulations (EU) No 920/2010 and No 1193/2011, OJ L 122, 3.5.2013, p. 1–59.

47 Commission Regulation (EU) No 389/2013 of 2 May 2013 establishing a Union Registry pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Decisions No 280/2004/EC and No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulations (EU) No 920/2010 and No 1193/2011 (OJ L 122, 3.5.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 25

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(25)  In accordance with market practice and the needs of market participants, the third-party effects of certain assignments of claims should, as an exception, be governed by the law of the assigned claim, that is, the law that governs the initial contract between the creditor and the debtor from which the claim arises.

(25)  In accordance with market practice and the needs of market participants, the third-party effects of certain assignments of claims should, as an exception, be governed by the law of the assigned claim, that is, the law that governs the initial contract between the creditor and the debtor which gives rise to the claim.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(28)  Flexibility should be provided in the determination of the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims in the context of a securitisation in order to cater for the needs of all securitisers and facilitate the expansion of the cross-border securitisation market to smaller operators. Whilst the law of the assignor’s habitual residence should apply as the default rule to the third-party effects of assignments of claims in the context of a securitisation, the assignor (originator) and the assignee (special purpose vehicle) should be able to choose that the law of the assigned claim should apply to the third-party effects of the assignment of claims. The assignor and the assignee should be able to decide that the third-party effects of the assignment of claims in the context of a securitisation should remain subject to the general rule of the assignor’s habitual residence or to choose the law of the assigned claim in function of the structure and characteristics of the transaction, for example the number and location of the originators and the number of laws which govern the assigned claims.

deleted

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(29)  Priority conflicts between assignees of the same claim may arise where the third-party effects of the assignment have been subject to the law of the assignor’s habitual residence in one assignment and to the law of the assigned claim in another assignment. In such cases, the law applicable to resolve the priority conflict should be the law applicable to the third-party effects of the assignment of the claim which has first become effective against third parties under its applicable law.

(29)  Priority conflicts between assignees of the same claim may arise where the third-party effects of the assignment have been subject to the law of the assignor’s habitual residence in one assignment and to the law of the assigned claim in another assignment. In such cases, the law applicable to resolve the priority conflict should be the law applicable to the third-party effects of the assignment of the claim which has first become effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where both assignments of claims become effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the assignor’s habitual residence should prevail.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(30)  The scope of the national law designated by this Regulation as the law applicable to the third-party effects of an assignment of claims should be uniform. The national law designated as applicable should govern in particular (i) the effectiveness of the assignment against third parties, that is, the steps that need to be taken by the assignee in order to ensure that he acquires legal title over the assigned claim (for example, registering the assignment with a public authority or registry, or notifying the debtor in writing of the assignment); and (ii) priority issues, that is, conflicts between several claimants as to who has title over the claim (for example, between two assignees where the same claim has been assigned twice, or between an assignee and a creditor of the assignor).

(30)  The scope of the national law designated by this Regulation as the law applicable to the third-party effects of an assignment of claims should be uniform. The national law designated as applicable should govern in particular (i) the effectiveness of the assignment against third parties, that is, the steps and procedures that need to be followed by the assignee in order to ensure that he acquires legal title over the assigned claim (for example, registering the assignment with a public authority or registry, or notifying the debtor in writing of the assignment); and (ii) priority issues, that is, the resolution of conflicts between several claimants as to who has title over the claim following a cross-border assignment (for example, between two assignees where the same claim has been assigned twice, or between an assignee and a creditor of the assignor).

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 34

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(34)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to promote the application of Articles 17 and 47 concerning, respectively, the right to property and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.

(34)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to promote the application of Articles 17 and 47 concerning, respectively, the right to property and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, as well as Article 16 concerning the freedom to conduct a business.

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This Regulation shall apply, in situations involving a conflict of laws, to the third-party effects of assignments of claims in civil and commercial matters.

This Regulation shall apply, in situations involving a conflict of laws, to the third-party effects of assignments of claims in civil and commercial matters other than third-party effects to the debtor of the claim assigned.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

1a.  This Regulation is without prejudice to Union and national law on consumer protection.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  assignment of claims arising from matrimonial property regimes, property regimes of relationships deemed by the law applicable to such relationships to have comparable effects to marriage, and wills and succession;

(b)  assignment of claims arising from matrimonial property regimes, property regimes of relationships deemed by the law applicable to such relationships to have comparable effects to marriage including registered partnerships, wills and succession;

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(fa)  assignment of claims in the course of a collective proceeding under Regulation (EU) 2015/848.

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e)  'third-party effects' means proprietary effects, that is, the right of the assignee to assert his legal title over a claim assigned to him towards other assignees or beneficiaries of the same or functionally equivalent claim, creditors of the assignor and other third parties;

(e)  'third-party effects' means the right of the assignee to assert his legal title over a claim assigned to him towards other assignees or beneficiaries of the same or functionally equivalent claim, creditors of the assignor and other third parties, excluding the debtor;

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(h)  ‘cash’ means money credited to an account in a credit institution in any currency;

deleted

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4

Article 4

Applicable law

Applicable law

1.  Unless otherwise provided for in this Article, the third-party effects of an assignment of claims shall be governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence at the material time.

1.   Unless otherwise provided for in this Article, the third-party effects of an assignment of claims shall be governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence at the time of the conclusion of the assignment contract.

Where the assignor has changed its habitual residence between two assignments of the same claim to different assignees, the priority of the right of an assignee over the right of another assignee shall be governed by the law of the habitual residence of the assignor at the time of the assignment which first became effective against third parties under the law designated as applicable pursuant to the first subparagraph.

Where the assignor has changed its habitual residence between two assignments of the same claim to different assignees, the priority of the right of an assignee over the right of another assignee shall be governed by the law of the habitual residence of the assignor at the time of the assignment which first became effective against other third parties under the law designated as applicable pursuant to the first subparagraph.

2.  The law applicable to the assigned claim shall govern the third-party effects of the assignment of:

2.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1 of this article, the law applicable to the assigned claim shall govern the third-party effects of the assignment of:

(a)  cash credited to an account in a credit institution;

(a)  money credited to an account in a credit institution;

(b)  claims arising from a financial instrument.

(b)  claims arising from financial instruments.

3.   The assignor and the assignee may choose the law applicable to the assigned claim as the law applicable to the third-party effects of an assignment of claims in view of a securitisation.

 

The choice of law shall be made expressly in the assignment contract or by a separate agreement. The substantive and formal validity of the act whereby the choice of law was made shall be governed by the chosen law.

 

4.  A priority conflict between assignees of the same claim where the third-party effects of one of the assignments are governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence and the third-party effects of other assignments are governed by the law of the assigned claim shall be governed by the law applicable to the third-party effects of the assignment of the claim which first became effective against third parties under its applicable law.

.  A priority conflict between assignees of the same claim where the third-party effects of one of the assignments are governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence and the third-party effects of other assignments are governed by the law of the assigned claim shall be governed by the law applicable to the third-party effects of the assignment of the claim which first became effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where both assignments become effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the country in which the assignor’s habitual residence is situated shall prevail.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a.  Effect shall be given to the overriding mandatory provisions of the law of the Member State where the assignment has to be or has been performed, insofar as those overriding mandatory provisions render the performance of the assignment contract unlawful.

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The law applicable pursuant to this Regulation shall determine whether the rights of a third party in respect of a claim assigned after the date of application of this Regulation have priority over the rights of another third person acquired before this Regulation becomes applicable.

2.  The law applicable pursuant to this Regulation shall determine whether the rights of a third party in respect of a claim assigned after the date of application of this Regulation have priority over the rights of another third person acquired before this Regulation becomes applicable. In the case of competing claims based on assignments, the law applicable pursuant to this Regulation shall determine the rights of the respective assignees, solely in respect of assignments concluded after ... [the date of application of this Regulation].


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Rules relating to the law applicable to third party effects of assignments of claims were included in the Commission proposal that later became Regulation (EC) No 593/208 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) but they did not end up in the final text. The clear intention of the legislators when lifting these questions out of the Rome I regulation was that the Commission should return with a proposal at a later stage.

The questions were raised again in the light of the 2015 Action Plan on Capital Markets Union (CMU). In May 2017 the Commission's Mid-term Review set out the remaining actions which will be taken to put in place the building blocks of the CMU by 2019, with the objective of removing barriers to cross-border investment and lowering the costs of funding.

Scope of the report

The proposal of the Commission has fifteen articles. It follows closely the Rome I and II Regulations. In this report the provisions specific to this Proposal has been put in focus, whilst provisions only copied over from Rome I and II have been left unchanged. This position has been taken specifically with the view of possibly concluding this legislative file before the end of the Legislature.

The main rule

In the Commission Proposal, the main rule for the applicable law to assignments is the law of the habitual residence of the assignor. This is the rule in place in some Member States, whilst others apply for instance the law applicable to the claim assigned. The main negative consequences of an assignment may appear for the creditors of the assignor or for other third parties related to the assignor. For this law of the habitual residence of the assignor will give a high degree of transparency and predictability for the third parties possibly concerned.

Explicit exclusion of debtors

The law applicable to the consequences of an assignment for the debtor is regulated in Article 14 of the Rome I Regulation. Not explicitly excluding debtors from third parties under this Regulation would mean that the provision in Rome I applies by way of being lex specialist but that the question may arise to what extent this Regulation supplements Rome I. To make the third party consequences for debtors be solely regulated by Rome I, an explicit exclusion should be introduced in this Regulation.

Exclusion of insolvency proceedings

Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament ans of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings contains rules relating to applicable law. For that reason, assignments done in the course of a collective proceeding according to that regulation should be excluded from the scope of application of this Regulation.

Securitisation

The Commission has proposed that the assignor and assignee would be able to choose the law applicable to third party consequences of an assignment. Such a rule goes across one of the fundamental principles of European civil law: that the parties to an agreement may not dispose over the rights of third parties by way of the agreement. To leave the parties to the assignment agreement in full discretion in the respect would, especially in the light of Article 3, go too far. However, a solution where the parties to the securitisation arrangement would be able to choose that the law applicable to the largest number of claims applies to all claims would achieve sufficient streamlining while it retains a sufficient level of protection for third parties.


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims

References

COM(2018)0096 – C8-0109/2018 – 2018/0044(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

7.3.2018

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

JURI

16.4.2018

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

ECON

16.4.2018

 

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

ECON

20.6.2018

 

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Pavel Svoboda

27.3.2018

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

24.4.2018

15.5.2018

20.6.2018

 

Date adopted

10.7.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

17

0

1

Members present for the final vote

Max Andersson, Joëlle Bergeron, Marie-Christine Boutonnet, Jean-Marie Cavada, Kostas Chrysogonos, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Gilles Lebreton, António Marinho e Pinto, Emil Radev, Pavel Svoboda, Axel Voss, Francis Zammit Dimech, Tadeusz Zwiefka

Substitutes present for the final vote

Pascal Durand, Angel Dzhambazki, Evelyne Gebhardt, Răzvan Popa

Date tabled

17.7.2018


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

17

+

ALDE

EFDD

ENF

PPE

S&D

VERTS/ALE

Jean-Marie Cavada, António Marinho e Pinto

Joëlle Bergeron

Marie-Christine Boutonnet, Gilles Lebreton

Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Emil Radev, Pavel Svoboda, Axel Voss, Francis Zammit Dimech, Tadeusz Zwiefka

Evelyne Gebhardt, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Razvan Popa

Max Andersson, Pascal Durand

0

-

 

 

1

0

ECR

Angel Dzhambazki

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

Last updated: 30 July 2018Legal notice