9 Maintenance Obligations
| (25578)
8832/04
COM(04) 254
| Commission Green Paper on Maintenance Obligations
|
| Legal base | ?— |
| Department | Constitutional Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 16 September 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 42-xxii (2003-04), para 5 (9 June 2004)
|
| To be discussed in Council | Not applicable
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared, but information on progress requested
|
Background
9.1 The programme of measures for the implementation of the principle
of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters,
agreed following the Tampere Council of October 1999, recognises
the importance of effective recovery of claims arising from maintenance
obligations in cases where the parties reside in different EU
Member States. It includes the abolition of the exequatur
procedure (the procedure whereby a foreign judgement is approved
or certified for enforcement within the national territory).
At present the enforcement of maintenance obligations is already
covered in part by the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001
on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements
in civil and commercial matters[17]
(the Brussels Regulation). The programme seeks to complement
the existing regime with a series of measures including the introduction
of provisional enforcement and interim measures of protection.
The programme also encourages Member States to explore the case
for introducing minimum guarantees governing procedural rules
for enforcement of maintenance claims at European level, as well
as extending the exchange of information relevant to the recovery
of maintenance claims.
The document
9.2 The document is a Commission Green Paper which sets out the
case for a future proposal for an EU instrument on maintenance
obligations. Such an instrument would cover not only court judgments,
but likewise orders made by relevant bodies with a quasi-judicial
capacity in aspects of matrimonial matters, such as the Child
Support Agency in this country and equivalent bodies in other
Member States. In addition, the Green Paper sets out the considerations
the Commission regards as relevant for the framing of such a future
legislative proposal. The purpose of the Green Paper is to start
a consultation process based on 37 questions, which the Commission
invited all interested parties to respond to. The Green Paper
is divided into four principal parts which, respectively, set
out the general background of the planned work of the Commission,
the relationship between Community legislation and the Hague Conventions
on maintenance obligations, the basic issues defining the scope
of Community legislation in this field, and finally the Commission's
37 questions covering the principal legal issues the Commission
regards as relevant to any legislative activity in this field
at EU level.
9.3 When we last reported on the document we noted
the Government's general support for the Commission's view on
the need for EU legislative activity to enforce maintenance obligations.
We also noted the Government's intention to give careful consideration
to the relationship between ongoing work at the Hague Convention
on the enforcement of cross-border maintenance claims and a new
Community instrument in this area. We took the view that the
Commission's Green Paper failed to make an adequate case for EU
legislation in addition to a modernisation of the existing Hague
rules, and asked the Minister whether the Government agreed that
the Commission should await the conclusion of the current negotiations
on a new Hague Convention on maintenance obligations. We also
asked the Minister whether the Government intended to opt into
a future EU instrument on maintenance obligations if the Commission
decided to go ahead with a legislative proposal independently
of any progress achieved at the Hague Conference, and, if so,
to state the Government's reasons for supporting additional Community
legislation and the likely benefits of such legislation. We decided
to hold the document under scrutiny pending the Minister's reply.
The Minister's reply
9.4 In her letter of 16 September 2004, the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Constitutional
Affairs (Baroness Ashton) replies to the Committee's questions
as follows:
"The Committee asks whether the Government
agrees that the Commission should await the conclusion of the
current negotiations on a new Hague Convention on maintenance
obligations. Our position throughout has been and remains that
we should await the outcome of the ongoing negotiations in the
Hague, before deciding whether an EU instrument is necessary.
At the Commission's meeting in Brussels 2 June 2004, there was
initial opposition by the majority of States to the proposal,
where we made our position clear. There was a general consensus
between Member States to postpone the production of any regulatory
instrument until after the Hague instrument is at least agreed.
Nevertheless the Commission wanted to forge ahead with its proposals
and will convene another meeting of experts after receiving responses
to the Green Paper.
"The Report asks whether the Government intends
to opt into a future EU instrument on maintenance obligations,
if the Commission goes ahead. It is too early for us to make
a decision at this stage, as it is still uncertain whether the
Commission will eventually decide to create a new instrument for
maintenance obligations. It is likely the Commission will issue
a detailed proposal after the consultation period and we will
need to see what is suggested there.
"The Committee asks me to explain the Government's
reasons for supporting additional Community legislation and to
outline the likely benefits of a Community measure in this area
if the Government intends opting into a future EU instrument in
maintenance obligations. Our view is the new global Hague instrument
should provide a good basis for administrative co-operation between
jurisdictions, by giving extensive functions to central authorities
and by providing cost effective and simple procedure for recognition
and enforcement. The Government would consider an EU instrument
that complemented or enhanced these provisions between Member
States."
Conclusion
9.5 We thank the Minister for her reply and explanation
of the Government's position. We note that the Government has
not yet provided detailed reasons that would establish the need
for EU legislation in addition to the updating of the existing
Hague Convention on Maintenance Obligations, and we note its view
that, in the absence of a Commission proposal, it might be too
early to do so.
9.6 As the Green Paper is effectively spent, we
are content to clear it from scrutiny, but we ask the Minister
to keep us informed of any further negotiations and Commission
initiatives in the area covered by the Green Paper.
17 OJ No. L 12, 16.1.01, p.1. Back
| 
