counsel_logo
Subscribe Advertise
×
LEGAL PERSONALITY PRACTICE TOOLSET JUSTICE MATTERS BON VIVANT CURRENT ISSUE BAR STUDENTS
Jobs & Career Hub View All Jobs Career Clinic Strategic Moves Partners Training Courses Training Course Providers
} Subscribe Advertise
  • LEGAL PERSONALITY
  • PRACTICE TOOLSET
  • JUSTICE MATTERS
  • BON VIVANT
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • BAR STUDENTS
  • Jobs & Career Hub
    • View All Jobs
    • Career Clinic
    • Strategic Moves
    • Partners
    • Training Courses
    • Training Course Providers
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Brussels Office report (February 2013)

Brussels Office report (February 2013)

31 January 2013
Categories: News
Printer Email

HMG’s Balance of Competences Review 2013 - 2014
Every quarter over the next two years or so,
individual Government Departments will prepare
reports drawing on evidence submitted to them in
response to individual calls regarding the balance
of competence between the UK and the EU, across
the range of EU activity. The EU Law Committee
of the Bar Council is considering the first batch
of calls, and will coordinate any positions taken
by the Bar over the next two years, in tandem
with relevant practice areas and Specialist Bar
Associations. Further information is on FCO
website: 

  • http://bit.ly/LhYRyz 

Protocol 36 to the Lisbon Treaty – the 2014 Opt-out – update
You will be aware that HMG is to take a decision,
before 1 June 2014, on whether or not the UK
should opt-out of a block of pre-Lisbon Treaty
criminal justice measures; and if it does, whether
and how it could opt back in to some of them.
The House of Lords EU Select Committee
is conducting an inquiry into the decision. In
December 2012, the Bar Council submitted a
written response, and by the time of reading, will
also have given oral evidence to their Lordships. 

Our position is clear - it would not be in the UK’s
interest to exercise the opt-out, even if it were
swiftly to be followed by individual opts-back-in
to certain measures. In our view, the measures
it affects are either vital (e.g. those facilitating
police co-operation); useful, and better than the
alternatives (e.g. the European Arrest Warrant
(EAW); or superseded, and thus harmless. Beyond
that, the Bar is amongst many concerned at the
likely loss of influence and goodwill among other
Member States and with the EU Institutions; the
very real likely cost to the UK in cash terms; not
to mention the potential practical chaos of interim
measures during any period awaiting a partial optback-
in. It is also unclear what provisions could be
put in place to fill the gaps, particularly at state-tostate
level. For more detail on the HoL inquiry, see: 

  • http://bit.ly/Zx8KPR 

Bar Chair at the Fundamental Rights Conference 2012
The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) co-hosted
a conference in Brussels in December last, on
Justice in Austerity, a conference title echoing the
Bar’s own successful event of June 2011. Maura
McGowan QC, Bar Chairman for 2013, gave a
contribution on the challenges on the ground as
a result of major cuts to legal aid budgets, which
was very well received. For conference highlights,
go to: 

  • http://bit.ly/Xerz5Z and 
  • http://bit.ly/Wo9G1W 

Revised Brussels I regulation adopted and in force
After several years of work, the recast Brussels
I regulation (Regulation 1215/2012) was formally
adopted in Council in December 2012, and entered
into force 20 days following its publication in the
Official Journal of the EU (20 December - OL L
351/1 – see: 

  • http://bit.ly/USN6j4 

The new regulation replaces regulation 44/2001 on
recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters, and applies to both the
UK and the Republic of Ireland. 

The key change is the abolition, with safeguards,
of the “exequatur” procedure, which had been
a pre-requisite to having a judgment in civil and
commercial matters recognized in another EU
country. Two other issues that were of particular
concern to us were the rules on ‘lis pendens’ and
the application of the regulation to arbitration. The
latter is excluded from scope, and the former has
been clarified. 

Common European Sales Law (contract) – work continues
The Bar has been engaged in the more than
decade-long debate on this file, which led to the
adoption in October 2011 of the Commission
proposal for a regulation creating the Common
European Sales Law (“CESL”, Procedure reference
COD(2011)0284) an optional instrument to be
used for cross-border B2C sales, and B2B
ones involving at least one SME. The Council of
Ministers and the European Parliament (EP) are
now working on their own versions of the text.
As I write, the Bar should be finalising a detailed
position paper intended to assist in that process.
The key EP committee has hinted that it may
narrow the scope of the instrument, in the first
instance, to internet-based sales. Its draft report
should be out in February / March 2013. HMG has
also presented its formal position paper on the
proposal, which sets out its ongoing concerns
about lack of need, legal uncertainty and cost.
See: 

  • http://bit.ly/yusECS 

Breakthrough agreement on ADR and ODR for B2C disputes
Just before Christmas, the European Parliament
and the Bar Council reached agreement on the
texts of two key legislative proposals which
together will make available, throughout the EU,
alternative means of dispute resolution (including
online – hence the “O” in ODR) for contractual
disputes between consumers and traders, arising
from the sale of goods or the provision of services.
Formal adoption of the texts should follow swiftly.
For more details, go to: 

  • http://bit.ly/VKd1d0 

E-Justice progress reports
In early December, the JHA Council examined a
couple of reports that provide an overview of the
current status of the myriad projects under the
European e-Justice action plan. Examples include
the use of e-signatures, ID cards; electronic
submission of court documents; searchable EUwide
databases etc. See: 

  • http://bit.ly/Xesgfw and 
  • http://bit.ly/XesnrC 

EU Unitary Patent System becoming a reality
After more than 30 years of effort, the EU is close
to creating a Unitary Patent system. It has adopted
two of the three necessary elements: the regulation
creating a unitary patent (Regulation 1257/2012) 

  • http://bit.ly/UILY3y 

and the regulation defining the applicable language
regime (Regulation 1260/2012) 

  • http://bit.ly/VKdjk8 

The third element, the draft intergovernmental
agreement setting up a Unified Patent Court,
should be signed off this month (February). You will
recall that its seat has already been agreed – Paris,
with specialist offices in London and Munich. 

Advantage: The unitary patent will be obtained
by filing a single application at the Munich-based
European Patent Office (EPO). Once granted,
a unitary patent will be valid and effective in all
participating Member States (all but Spain and
Italy), without any further steps being required.
The new Unified Patent Court will have exclusive
competence in cases relating to the validity or
infringement of classic European patents and
patents with unitary effect, thus eliminating the
risk of multiple patent lawsuits in different Member
States for the same patent. 

EU consultation on the protection of non-patentable trade secrets
The European Commission is consulting the public
on how to go about protecting valuable business
data in the Internal Market that is not patentable,
such as incremental technological improvements,
or marketing data. They are concerned that the
lack of such protection, or adequate redress
which might deter theft, is hampering the sharing
of valuable information across borders between
business partners, which in turn is hampering
business development. The deadline for responses
is 8 March 2013. The Intellectual Bar Association
may respond. See: 

  • http://bit.ly/Ug5guC 

Commission’s Action Plan on the Modernisation of Company law
In December 2012, the Commission published an
Action Plan (AP) outlining future initiatives in the
areas of company law and corporate governance.
Its annex contains a useful table setting out a
timeline of the main initiatives foreseen. There are
three main categories of initiative, respectively
intended to: 

  1. Encourage and facilitate long-term shareholder engagement 
  2. Increase the level of transparency between companies and their shareholders, and 
  3. Simplify cross-border operations of European undertakings. 

In addition, the AP foresees the codifi cation of
all major company law directives into a single
instrument – expect a proposal this year. See: 

  • http://bit.ly/XtSBri 

The Commission will provide updates on: 

  • http://bit.ly/fpPXt 

Proposals to modernise the EU public procurement rules
Regular readers will know of the ongoing
negotiations on an important package of
measures aimed at overhauling the EU public
procurement rules, among them the proposal for a
directive on Public Procurement (COD(2011)0438.
In December, the lead EP committee adopted its
report and the Council of Ministers reached its
own general approach. These respective texts will
inform the positions taken by both co-legislators
as they try to reach formal agreement. The EP’s
guiding principle is that public procurement
contracts should go to the “most economically
advantageous tender”, assessed on environmental
or social criteria. To cut red tape, MEPs propose
to establish a “procurement passport” to show
that a fi rm fulfi ls the criteria without having to send
in documentation every time they make a bid.
They also simplifi ed the proposed rules enabling
public authorities to subdivide contracts into
lots, so as to enable small fi rms to bid for them.
On the key issue of the directive’s application to
legal services, it appears that both the EP and the
Council are minded to exclude certain categories
from scope (Article 10). See: 

  • http://bit.ly/UCOur7 and 
  • http://bit.ly/TGwM7b 

Reform of the EU banking sector
The European Commission recently conducted a
public consultation on the recommendations of
the High-Level expert group on the Reform of the
Banking Sector. The results of the consultation are
summarised at: 

  • http://bit.ly/XDtLb3 

and can be viewed in full at: 

  • http://bit.ly/URhcWd 

Banking Union moves closer
In mid-December, the EU Heads of State reached
a general approach on two proposals aimed at
establishing a single supervisory mechanism
(SSM) for the oversight of banks and credit
institutions in the Eurozone, and potentially
beyond. The two regulations respectively confer
supervisory tasks on the European Central Bank,
and modify regulation 1093/2010 establishing the
European Banking Authority. See: 

  • http://bit.ly/UvIL4O and 
  • http://bit.ly/TGwRb0 

If formally adopted the combination will create
a two-tier structure with major Eurozone banks
falling under the direct supervisory control of
the European Central Bank (ECB), and a second
tier remaining under the supervision of national
regulators, which in turn would be answerable to
the ECB. The legal niceties of these arrangements
have been the subject of criticism in recent
weeks and are likely to take many months to
iron out. For those interested, note also that on
the eve of the Council breakthrough, the House
of Lords EU Sub-Committee on Economic and
Financial Affairs published its fi nal report, with
full recommendations on the reform of the EU
Banking sector, entitled European Banking Union:
Key issues and challenges. 

European Judicial Training network online courses
I thought I’d draw your attention to the website
of the European Judicial Training Network, which
does as the name suggests. There are currently
links to three free e-learning courses, respectively
on: Parental Responsibility and the Brussels
II regulation; the European Order for Payment
Procedure; and Creating a European Order for
uncontested claims. See: 

  • http://bit.ly/WoczzY 

Developments on these and other current issues
are reported in Brussels News, the regular
newsletter of the Brussels Offi ce for members
of the Bar of England and Wales. Please e-mail:
evanna.fruithof@barcouncil.be for further
information. 


Evanna Fruithof
Consultant Director, Bar Council of England and Wales, Brussels Office 

Printer Email
Home > News > Brussels Office report (February 2013)

Brussels Office report (February 2013)

Date: 31 January 2013

HMG’s Balance of Competences Review 2013 - 2014
Every quarter over the next two years or so,
individual Government Departments will prepare
reports drawing on evidence submitted to them in
response to individual calls regarding the balance
of competence between the UK and the EU, across
the range of EU activity. The EU Law Committee
of the Bar Council is considering the first batch
of calls, and will coordinate any positions taken
by the Bar over the next two years, in tandem
with relevant practice areas and Specialist Bar
Associations. Further information is on FCO
website:

  • http://bit.ly/LhYRyz

Protocol 36 to the Lisbon Treaty – the 2014 Opt-out – update
You will be aware that HMG is to take a decision,
before 1 June 2014, on whether or not the UK
should opt-out of a block of pre-Lisbon Treaty
criminal justice measures; and if it does, whether
and how it could opt back in to some of them.
The House of Lords EU Select Committee
is conducting an inquiry into the decision. In
December 2012, the Bar Council submitted a
written response, and by the time of reading, will
also have given oral evidence to their Lordships.

Our position is clear - it would not be in the UK’s
interest to exercise the opt-out, even if it were
swiftly to be followed by individual opts-back-in
to certain measures. In our view, the measures
it affects are either vital (e.g. those facilitating
police co-operation); useful, and better than the
alternatives (e.g. the European Arrest Warrant
(EAW); or superseded, and thus harmless. Beyond
that, the Bar is amongst many concerned at the
likely loss of influence and goodwill among other
Member States and with the EU Institutions; the
very real likely cost to the UK in cash terms; not
to mention the potential practical chaos of interim
measures during any period awaiting a partial optback-
in. It is also unclear what provisions could be
put in place to fill the gaps, particularly at state-tostate
level. For more detail on the HoL inquiry, see:

  • http://bit.ly/Zx8KPR

Bar Chair at the Fundamental Rights Conference 2012
The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) co-hosted
a conference in Brussels in December last, on
Justice in Austerity, a conference title echoing the
Bar’s own successful event of June 2011. Maura
McGowan QC, Bar Chairman for 2013, gave a
contribution on the challenges on the ground as
a result of major cuts to legal aid budgets, which
was very well received. For conference highlights,
go to:

  • http://bit.ly/Xerz5Z and
  • http://bit.ly/Wo9G1W

Revised Brussels I regulation adopted and in force
After several years of work, the recast Brussels
I regulation (Regulation 1215/2012) was formally
adopted in Council in December 2012, and entered
into force 20 days following its publication in the
Official Journal of the EU (20 December - OL L
351/1 – see:

  • http://bit.ly/USN6j4

The new regulation replaces regulation 44/2001 on
recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters, and applies to both the
UK and the Republic of Ireland.

The key change is the abolition, with safeguards,
of the “exequatur” procedure, which had been
a pre-requisite to having a judgment in civil and
commercial matters recognized in another EU
country. Two other issues that were of particular
concern to us were the rules on ‘lis pendens’ and
the application of the regulation to arbitration. The
latter is excluded from scope, and the former has
been clarified.

Common European Sales Law (contract) – work continues
The Bar has been engaged in the more than
decade-long debate on this file, which led to the
adoption in October 2011 of the Commission
proposal for a regulation creating the Common
European Sales Law (“CESL”, Procedure reference
COD(2011)0284) an optional instrument to be
used for cross-border B2C sales, and B2B
ones involving at least one SME. The Council of
Ministers and the European Parliament (EP) are
now working on their own versions of the text.
As I write, the Bar should be finalising a detailed
position paper intended to assist in that process.
The key EP committee has hinted that it may
narrow the scope of the instrument, in the first
instance, to internet-based sales. Its draft report
should be out in February / March 2013. HMG has
also presented its formal position paper on the
proposal, which sets out its ongoing concerns
about lack of need, legal uncertainty and cost.
See:

  • http://bit.ly/yusECS

Breakthrough agreement on ADR and ODR for B2C disputes
Just before Christmas, the European Parliament
and the Bar Council reached agreement on the
texts of two key legislative proposals which
together will make available, throughout the EU,
alternative means of dispute resolution (including
online – hence the “O” in ODR) for contractual
disputes between consumers and traders, arising
from the sale of goods or the provision of services.
Formal adoption of the texts should follow swiftly.
For more details, go to:

  • http://bit.ly/VKd1d0

E-Justice progress reports
In early December, the JHA Council examined a
couple of reports that provide an overview of the
current status of the myriad projects under the
European e-Justice action plan. Examples include
the use of e-signatures, ID cards; electronic
submission of court documents; searchable EUwide
databases etc. See:

  • http://bit.ly/Xesgfw and
  • http://bit.ly/XesnrC

EU Unitary Patent System becoming a reality
After more than 30 years of effort, the EU is close
to creating a Unitary Patent system. It has adopted
two of the three necessary elements: the regulation
creating a unitary patent (Regulation 1257/2012)

  • http://bit.ly/UILY3y

and the regulation defining the applicable language
regime (Regulation 1260/2012)

  • http://bit.ly/VKdjk8

The third element, the draft intergovernmental
agreement setting up a Unified Patent Court,
should be signed off this month (February). You will
recall that its seat has already been agreed – Paris,
with specialist offices in London and Munich.

Advantage: The unitary patent will be obtained
by filing a single application at the Munich-based
European Patent Office (EPO). Once granted,
a unitary patent will be valid and effective in all
participating Member States (all but Spain and
Italy), without any further steps being required.
The new Unified Patent Court will have exclusive
competence in cases relating to the validity or
infringement of classic European patents and
patents with unitary effect, thus eliminating the
risk of multiple patent lawsuits in different Member
States for the same patent.

EU consultation on the protection of non-patentable trade secrets
The European Commission is consulting the public
on how to go about protecting valuable business
data in the Internal Market that is not patentable,
such as incremental technological improvements,
or marketing data. They are concerned that the
lack of such protection, or adequate redress
which might deter theft, is hampering the sharing
of valuable information across borders between
business partners, which in turn is hampering
business development. The deadline for responses
is 8 March 2013. The Intellectual Bar Association
may respond. See:

  • http://bit.ly/Ug5guC

Commission’s Action Plan on the Modernisation of Company law
In December 2012, the Commission published an
Action Plan (AP) outlining future initiatives in the
areas of company law and corporate governance.
Its annex contains a useful table setting out a
timeline of the main initiatives foreseen. There are
three main categories of initiative, respectively
intended to:

  1. Encourage and facilitate long-term shareholder engagement
  2. Increase the level of transparency between companies and their shareholders, and
  3. Simplify cross-border operations of European undertakings.

In addition, the AP foresees the codifi cation of
all major company law directives into a single
instrument – expect a proposal this year. See:

  • http://bit.ly/XtSBri

The Commission will provide updates on:

  • http://bit.ly/fpPXt

Proposals to modernise the EU public procurement rules
Regular readers will know of the ongoing
negotiations on an important package of
measures aimed at overhauling the EU public
procurement rules, among them the proposal for a
directive on Public Procurement (COD(2011)0438.
In December, the lead EP committee adopted its
report and the Council of Ministers reached its
own general approach. These respective texts will
inform the positions taken by both co-legislators
as they try to reach formal agreement. The EP’s
guiding principle is that public procurement
contracts should go to the “most economically
advantageous tender”, assessed on environmental
or social criteria. To cut red tape, MEPs propose
to establish a “procurement passport” to show
that a fi rm fulfi ls the criteria without having to send
in documentation every time they make a bid.
They also simplifi ed the proposed rules enabling
public authorities to subdivide contracts into
lots, so as to enable small fi rms to bid for them.
On the key issue of the directive’s application to
legal services, it appears that both the EP and the
Council are minded to exclude certain categories
from scope (Article 10). See:

  • http://bit.ly/UCOur7 and
  • http://bit.ly/TGwM7b

Reform of the EU banking sector
The European Commission recently conducted a
public consultation on the recommendations of
the High-Level expert group on the Reform of the
Banking Sector. The results of the consultation are
summarised at:

  • http://bit.ly/XDtLb3

and can be viewed in full at:

  • http://bit.ly/URhcWd

Banking Union moves closer
In mid-December, the EU Heads of State reached
a general approach on two proposals aimed at
establishing a single supervisory mechanism
(SSM) for the oversight of banks and credit
institutions in the Eurozone, and potentially
beyond. The two regulations respectively confer
supervisory tasks on the European Central Bank,
and modify regulation 1093/2010 establishing the
European Banking Authority. See:

  • http://bit.ly/UvIL4O and
  • http://bit.ly/TGwRb0

If formally adopted the combination will create
a two-tier structure with major Eurozone banks
falling under the direct supervisory control of
the European Central Bank (ECB), and a second
tier remaining under the supervision of national
regulators, which in turn would be answerable to
the ECB. The legal niceties of these arrangements
have been the subject of criticism in recent
weeks and are likely to take many months to
iron out. For those interested, note also that on
the eve of the Council breakthrough, the House
of Lords EU Sub-Committee on Economic and
Financial Affairs published its fi nal report, with
full recommendations on the reform of the EU
Banking sector, entitled European Banking Union:
Key issues and challenges.

European Judicial Training network online courses
I thought I’d draw your attention to the website
of the European Judicial Training Network, which
does as the name suggests. There are currently
links to three free e-learning courses, respectively
on: Parental Responsibility and the Brussels
II regulation; the European Order for Payment
Procedure; and Creating a European Order for
uncontested claims. See:

  • http://bit.ly/WoczzY

Developments on these and other current issues
are reported in Brussels News, the regular
newsletter of the Brussels Offi ce for members
of the Bar of England and Wales. Please e-mail:
evanna.fruithof@barcouncil.be for further
information.


Evanna Fruithof
Consultant Director, Bar Council of England and Wales, Brussels Office

Category: 
News [1]

*/


SourceURL:

Links:
Subscribe Advertise

Job of the Week

View All Jobs
Family Team Legal Secretary

Family Team Legal Secretary

Birmingham

We are seeking a permanent, full-time Family & Childcare Team Secretary for our newly expanded team in our Birmingham office.

virtual magazine View virtual issue

Chair’s Column

Read All
Feature image

Bleak House to Europe with a Swansea ice cream

Update from the Chair of the Bar

Silk Supplement 2026Silk Supplement 2026
Bar Student Guide 2025Bar Student Guide 2025
Bar Student Guide 2024Bar Student Guide 2024
View bar student guide 2023View student guide 2023
AI special issueAI special issue

Sponsored

Read All

Planning beyond practice: how to plan for retirement with confidence

By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group

Future-proofing chambers

Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study

PR at the Bar

How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR 

Beyond the cut-off

Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings 

AlphaBiolabs backs Endometriosis Awareness North with £500 donation

Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative

Most Viewed

Domestic abuse-induced suicide – the causal connection

A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution

The safeguard we are about to discard

The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC

Lesson learnt: Bridging worlds

Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt

The CPS outlook on VAWG

Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice

Door tenancy as a strategic extension

Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base

Partner Logo

Latest Cases

Read All
Pricewatch Ltd v Gausden (East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services) Lessees and Management Company of Herons Court v Heronslea Ltd and others Pricewatch Ltd v Gausden (East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services) R (on the application of Lasham Gliding Society Ltd) v Civil Aviation Authority Hinrichs and others v Oracle Corporation UK Ltd
footer logo
Lexis House, 30 Farringdon Street, London EC4A 4HH.
CONTACT US
0330 161 1234
GET IN TOUCH
  • Worldwide: United Kingdom
    • Argentina
    • Australia
    • Austria
    • Belgium
    • Canada
    • Chile
    • China
    • Columbia
    • Denmark
    • Finland
    • France
    • Germany
    • Greece
    • Hong Kong
    • India
    • International Sales(Includes Middle East)
    • Israel
    • Italy
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • Luxembourg
    • Malaysia
    • Mexico
    • Netherlands
    • New Zealand
    • Norway
    • Philippines
    • Singapore
    • South Africa
    • Spain
    • Sweden
    • Switzerland
    • Taiwan
    • Turkey
    • United States
QUICK LINKS
Jobs and Career Hub
Directory
Current Issue
Features
Editorial Board
About us
Write for us
Bar Council
Wellbeing at the Bar
Bar Representation Fee
Bar Standards Board
Attract Better Legal Candidates
PARTNER SITES
New Law Journal
Tolley
LexisNexis
Tax Journal
Taxation
POLICIES
Data Protection
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Subscribe
Advertise with us
Protecting human rights: Our Modern Slavery Act Statement
Copyright © 2026 Bar Council LexisNexis