Member States' compliance with EU law in 2018: efforts are paying off, but improvements still needed


The Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU law sets out how the European Commission monitored and enforced EU law in 2018. The online Single Market Scoreboard, also published today, evaluates the performance of EU/EEA countries in the EU single market and identifies the shortcomings where the countries and the Commission should step up their efforts.
Citizens and businesses can only enjoy the many benefits of the single market if the rules that have been jointly agreed actually work on the ground. In November 2018, the Commission presented a fresh assessment of remaining barriers in the single market and called on Member States to be vigilant in implementing, applying and enforcing EU rules and refrain from putting up new barriers. For instance, from car emissions to e-commerce, from social media to the services sector, and much more besides.
The Commission continues to ensure that EU rules are properly applied and enforced. For instance, in 2018, the Commission acted firmly in enforcing rules in a number of policy areas. The Commission supported national and regional authorities in implementing clear air and clean water rules. It also took action against Member States who failed to live up to their commitments and implement EU rules on Passenger Name Records, on combating terrorism and on anti-money laundering. In addition, the Commission used enforcement powers when some EU countries did not move fast enough to improve access for people with disabilities to websites and other mobile applications.
Annual report on monitoring the application of EU law in 2018
The Annual Reportfor 2018 shows a small increase (by 0.8%) of open infringement cases (1571) compared to 1559 cases in 2017. Thus after reaching a five-year peak in 2016, the number of cases started to level off by 5% in 2018 since 2016 (see Chart 1). Amongst others, the main policy areas concerned were on matters of environment, mobility and transport as well as internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs. Each failure to correctly apply EU law denies citizens and businesses the rights and the benefits they enjoy under EU law. In the area of environment, for example, the Commission continued measures to ensure full compliance with the Air Quality Directive as regards PM10 and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) limit values, as well as monitoring systems across the EU.
Chart 2 (see Annex) provides an overview of the situation for each Member State. Concerning late transposition cases, Cyprus, Belgium, and Spain had the highest amount of open cases, whereas the fewest were open in Estonia, Denmark and Italy. Spain, Italy, and Germany had the highest number of cases pending for incorrect transposition and/or wrong application of EU law, while Estonia had the lowest total number of open cases last year. The policy areas in which most new infringement cases were opened in 2018 were EU Internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs as well as mobility and transport (see Chart 3).
Combating late transposition of EU Directives
For citizens and businesses to reap the benefits of EU law, it is crucial that Member States transpose European directives into their national legal order within the deadlines.
In 2018, the number of new infringement procedures relating to late transposition decreased sharply by one fourth (from 558 cases in 2017 to 419 in 2018). However, the highest number of new late transposition cases during the Juncker Commission was in 2016 (847 cases). The Commission launched new infringement procedures against a majority of Member States for failing to transpose EU personal data protection rules (Directive 2016/680/EU) into national law on time, as agreed by Member States themselves beforehand. To facilitate timely and correct transposition, the Commission continued to assist Member States by preparing implementation plans, dedicated websites and guidance documents, and by exchanging best practices in expert group meetings.
Last year, the Commission referred 5 Member States to the Court of Justice of the EU requesting financial penalties be applied: Slovenia (3 cases: C-628/18, C-69/18 and C-188/18), Spain (3 cases: C-430/18, C-165/18 and C-164/18), and Belgium (C-676/18), Ireland (C-550/18) and Romania (C-549/18) (1 case each).
Single Market Scoreboard 2019
The Single Market Scoreboard provides a detailed overview of how EU single market rules were applied in the European Economic Area (EEA) in 2018; how open and integrated certain markets are; and how much Member States contributed to a number of EU tools to make the single market function better.
Depending on their performance in 2018, Member States were given 153 green, 137 yellow and 59 red cards indicating excellent (green), average (yellow) or below average (red) performance.
The overview (see Chart 4 in Annex) shows that, despite further expansion of trade in goods and services, the situation has worsened in certain policy areas since 2017. Member States improved the functioning of some Single Market tools, such as the Your Europe portal and the Internal Market Information System (IMI). However, countries received more red cards on a number of policy areas than last year. For instance, on the fairness of public procurement systems and the recognition of professional qualifications. The same happened with regard to the cooperation in EU pilots.
In general, the best performing countries were Portugal, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and Lithuania, while the most red and yellow cards were given to Spain, Italy, Greece and Luxembourg.
The Commission reacts to citizens' complaints
Citizens, businesses, NGOs and other stakeholders can report suspected breaches of EU law through an online complaint form accessible via the Europa “Your rights” portal. In 2018, the majority of new complaints concerned justice and consumer rights; EU internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs; as well as employment and social affairs matters. Thanks to the SOLVIT portal, an informal problem-solving network of the Commission and the Member States, citizens and businesses can seek a solution to their problems with a public authority in another EU country.
Background
Since 1984, following a request made by the European Parliament, the Commission presents an Annual report on monitoring the application of EU law during the preceding year. The European Parliament then adopts a resolution on the Commission's report.
As a matter of priority, the Commission targets problems where its enforcement action can make a real difference and benefit individuals and businesses. In the division of responsibilities between the European institutions, the European Commission has the general responsibility of initiating the legislative process. The Council and the European Parliament decide on the Commission's proposals. The Member States are responsible for the timely and correct application, implementation and enforcement of EU law in the national legal order. The Commission closes this circle: once proposals are adopted and become EU law, it monitors whether the Member States are applying this law correctly and takes action if they are not. The Commission should therefore act firmly and quickly when infringements obstruct the achievement of EU policy objectives. In this vein, the Commission recently set out its more strategic approach to enforcement in terms of handling infringements, in line with its commitment to be ‘bigger and more ambitious on big things, and smaller and more modest on small things'.
The annual Single Market Scoreboard evaluates how Member States:
-   implement EU rules;
-   create open and integrated markets (e.g. public procurement, trade in goods and services);
-   handle administrative issues concerning foreign workers (e.g. professional qualifications);
-   cooperate and contribute to a number of EU-wide governance tools (e.g. Your Europe portal, Solvit, and EURES)
The Single Market Scoreboard evaluates performance in four policy areas, two areas regarding market openness and integration, and 13 governance tools.
For More Information:
a) Annual report on Monitoring the application of EU law in 2018:
- Annual report on national implementation of EU law
- Fact sheets by country
- EU-28 fact sheet
- On the general EU infringement procedure, see a full MEMO of 17/01/2012.
b) Single Market Scoreboard (edition 2019 based on data in 2018):
- Scoreboard
- Fact sheets by country
- Performance overview
ANNEX - IP/19/3030
 (europa.eu)

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Intellectual property: the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark

Image
In its Judgment in Case T-82/24 (Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO) (RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F**K YOURSELF) the General Court ruled that the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark. That phrase, which has become a symbol of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression, is not perceived as an indication of a commercial origin.  The Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) requests the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 st December 2023, which refused registration of the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark: ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ That mark is a war cry uttered by the Ukrainian border guard on Snake Island on 24th February 2022, the first day of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Registration was sou...
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

Prohibiting contact between children and their mother in custody and contact rights case was unjustified (ECtHR)

Image
The case of X and Others v. Slovenia (application nos. 27746/22 and 28291/22) concerned custody decisions and contact rights following the separation of X from her children’s father in 2018. It also concerned the reassignment of X’s court case to a particular judge.  In Chamber's judgment in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights, as regards X’s right to a tribunal established by law, and violations of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) with respect both to:  - the applicant children, as regards the order to remove them from X’s (their mother’s) care in March 2020, their not being represented in the contact and custody proceedings, and their not being allowed contact with their mother;  - X, for not being allowed contact with her children.  The Court found in particular that the President of the District Co...
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that t...
Read more

European Ombudsman asks Commission to publish details of its handling of senior staff move to law firm

Image
The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to th...
Read more

European Data Protection Board clarifies rules for data sharing with third country authorities and approves EU Data Protection Seal certification

Image
During its latest plenary, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published  guidelines on Art.48 GDPR  about data transfers to third country authorities and  approved a new European Data Protection Seal. Αs stated in a press release from the EDPB, in a highly interconnected world, organisations receive requests from public authorities in other countries to share personal data. The sharing of data can, for instance, be of help to collect evidence in the case of crime, to check financial transactions or approve new medications. When a European organisation receives a request for a transfer of data from a ‘third country’ (i.e. non-European countries) authority, it must comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In its guidelines, the EDPB zooms in on Art. 48 GDPR and clarifies how organisations can best assess under which conditions they can lawfully respond to such requests. In this way, the guidelines help organisations to make a decision on whether...
Read more