3.1.1 Compliance issues identified in the Member States
As was noted in Section 1, this report complements the previous study undertaken for the European Parliament (2010). A summary of the compliance issues in the Member States identified in the European Parliament study is given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Summary of reported compliance issues in Member States covered by EP
Member State Label Guide Poster Promotional
Material
Austria N/A N/A N/A N/A
Czech Republic N/A N/A
Finland N/A N/A N/A N/A
France N/A
Germany N/A N/A N/A
Italy N/A N/A
Netherlands N/A N/A
Poland N/A N/A N/A
Sweden
UK N/A N/A N/A N/A
Source: “Study on consumer information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions of new passenger cars”, European Parliament, 2010)
Of the Member States that it surveyed, European Parliament (2010) noted that the most common issues relating to compliance that were reported were in relation to the promotional material. However, few legal proceedings were identified and those that were initiated were often dropped as a result of the violation being addressed. The report identified legal action for various infringements in a number of countries, including seven fines in the Czech Republic (based on a 2007 compliance survey), 16 cases that involved court proceedings in France (based on a 2005 survey) and 17 sets of legal proceedings in Germany (between 2006 and March 2010).
A summary of the compliance issues identified in the Member States covered in this study is presented in Table 3.2. An important point to make with respect to the information presented is that it has not been collated over comparable periods, e.g. some information relates to a survey undertaken in a particular month or months, while information presents the cumulative number of cases that have arisen up to a certain date. The survey undertaken by Trafikstyrelsen in Denmark was the only ongoing survey that was identified in the Member States covered, while regular surveys have been undertaken – sometimes at irregular intervals – in France, Belgium and the UK. In Romania, the survey for which the information was presented relates to a survey undertaken in November 2010. In Germany, the information relating to promotional material represents a cumulative figure of cases between 2006 and early 2010. However, these are the only provisions for which information on non- compliance is collated at the federal level (see Section 3.2); all of the other information presented for Germany relates to surveys undertaken by selected Länder.
From the information presented, it can be seen that, where reviews of compliance have been undertaken, some degree of non-compliance was identified. In many cases, non-compliance is relatively low, e.g. in the order of, and in many cases less than, 10%. In Hungary no cases of non-compliance were known by the national ministry.
The surveys that have been undertaken on more than one occasion (if not ongoing), e.g. the ones by the Trafikstyrelsen in Denmark, the DGCCRF in France and the LowCVP, suggest that compliance has increased over time. However, surveys undertaken by NGOs or independent institutes have often revealed higher levels of non-compliance than those perceived by the authorities responsible.
Few cases of legal action were identified in the Member States covered in this study. In Denmark two cases of non-compliance were referred to the police as a result of the survey undertaken in the first quarter of 2011, while in Romania there were 69 fines and 97 warnings resulting from the 2010 survey and 117 proceedings were taken forward in Spain after the 2010 campaign. There is one ongoing legal case in Germany, which was taken against a car manufacturer with respect to an advert in a magazine that did not contain the necessary information. The issue on which the case was based was the interpretation of the EU requirements in national legislation; the manufacturer lost the initial case and is appealing.
Table 3.2: Summary of compliance issues reported by Member States covered in this project
Label Poster Guide Promotional
material
Source, survey size, date
Belgium *10% no labels 12% some missing 46% 10% no poster) 14% (8% no guide)
* Belgian Environment Department/Ministry, 100 showrooms, early 2011
Denmark 10% not satisfactory Not always * * Trafikstyrelsen, about 50, first quarter 2011
France 10% Direction General de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la
Répression des Fraudes (DGCCRF), 2009 Germany 67 (39%)1 4 (17%)2a 3 (5%)3 17 (10%)1 14 (48%)2b 7 (13%)3 10 (6%)1 1 (4%)2a 6 (11%)3 3064 1 Rhineland-Palatinate, 171, 2010 2
Bremen, 24 retailers/29 brands, 2010 3 Saarland, 56, Nov 2010 – Jan 2011 4
German Competition Office (Wettbewerbszentrale), 2006/10 Hungary None known**
Romania 1% 16% 13% Only 1 case National Authority for Consumer Protection, 307, 2 to 6 November 2010
Spain 10% Instituto Nacional del Consumo, 2010
UK 7%1 None known** None known 49 alleged
violations2 1
Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (Low CVP); 2
Vehicle Certification Agency Notes: * No information
3.1.2 EC infringement proceedings
Action against Member States in relation to Directive 1999/94 began in 2001 when the Commission sent a Reasoned Opinion (effectively a second warning letter) to France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Greece, Spain and Portugal for failing to adopt and communicate the necessary laws to the Commission25. In 2002, the Commission referred France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for failing to implement the Directive26. In July 2005, the Commission announced that Luxembourg had been sent a final written warning over its failure to submit a report under Article 9 of the Directive27, while Italy was sent a final warning for failing to notify the Commission of its implementing legislation for Directive 2003/7328.
A search of website of the Court of Justice of the European Union29 for cases relating to Directive 1999/94 revealed the results presented in Table 3.3. This suggests that, of the six countries referred to the ECJ in 2002, legal action was begun against all of the countries except the UK.
Table 3.3: Summary of cases relating to Directive 1999/94
Country Date
Commission brought action against the following countries for failing to bring into force (or at least for having failed to inform the Commission of) the necessary laws to comply with Directive 1999/94
Spain January 2002
Italy January 2002
France April 2002
Greece February 2006 (in relation to Commission Directive 2003/73/EC
Court found against the following countries for failing to adopt or communicate to the Commission the necessary laws to comply with Directive 1999/94
France June 2003 (for failing to communicate the necessary laws) Italy September 2003 (for failing to adopt the necessary laws) Germany September 2003 (for failing to adopt the necessary laws)
Commission brought action against the following countries for failing to submit a report to the Commission under Article 9 of Directive 1999/94
Luxembourg May 2006
Court found against the following countries for failing to submit a report to the Commission under Article 9 of Directive 1999/94
Luxembourg December 2006
According to EP (2010), the European Commission investigated seven Member States (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Slovenia and Spain) in 2008 for failing to ensure that the fuel consumption figures were prominently displayed in car advertisements (in accordance with Annex IV of the Directive). The action followed an official complaint from several NGOs, including Friends of the Earth.
25
Press release “Commission acts against France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, UK, Greece, Spain and Portugal over fuel economy and CO2 emissions data”; IP/01/1146, date 30/07/2001
26
Press release “Air quality and emissions: Commission moves against France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Greece, Spain, Austria, Italy, Ireland, Denmark and Finland over non-implementation of EU laws”; IP/02/414, date 14/03/2002
27
Press release “Luxembourg: Commission takes action over infringements of environmental laws”; IP/05/912, date 12/07/2005
28
Press release “Italy: Commission takes action over infringements of environmental laws”; IP/05/10007, date 26/07/2005
29