3.

- *

1

, 10 - , , , . . 65 , -1.

2007 . - , 2. , , .

, , - 3, - . , , , , - , , -

1 . 95 , -.

2 COM (2008) 373 def. of 2 July 2008: Communication from the Commission to the Coun-cil and the European Parliament, Report on Implementation of the Hague Programme for 2007. , -, , .

3 European Council of Tampere, 15 and 16 October 1999, Bull. EU. 101999, p. 715, Nos. 2839.

* .. .

4 -

4. . . , , , . - - .

, . - - .

- , - - . : , - 5, 6 - 7.

- , - , .

2.

2.1.

1 1999 - - . 10 - , - .

-

4 1/2009 ( -) 11 2009 , 00339/09/EN, WP 158.

5 EC No. 805/2004 of 21 April 2004, OJ 2004 L 143/15.6 EC No. 1896/2006 of 12 December 2006, OJ 2006 L 399/1.7 EC No. 861/2007 of 11 July 2007, OJ 2007, L 199/1.

5.

. , - - . , , , - .

- : , , -- , . , , : 2, : . ( . 95 , )8. , , , () , -9.

, - , , , , - . , - .

2.2.

1999 - , . .65 , ,

8 Directive 2004/48 (EC) of 29 April 2004, OJ L 195/16 of 2 June 2004.9 . 10191019i . -

- , , , .

6 -

. .65 , - , - , - , -.

. - , -, (33).

I, - 10. - , ()11. . . - - - , . - , - , -, . , - .

2.3.

- . - . , I, , - ,

10 OJ 2001, p. 12/1: Draft programme of measures for implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters.

11 EC No. 805/2004 of 21 April 2004, OJ 2004, L 143/15.

7.

-. , , - .6 -. , . . -.

-, , 1 2004 , .6 . 15 - , , , , . , - 15 -. - 12.

, - , , , - . , , - .

3. -

3.1.

- , , - . - I, II, , -- , - - , . , , -

12 Stadler 2004, . 311.

8 -

, , . , -, .

, , , , , . , , - .

3.2.

-- :

a) : , .65 , - ?;

b) : - () ?;

c) : - -, ?

- , - :

1) , - ;

2) -

3) - .

- :

1) ;2) 3) .

9.

- , , .

3.2.1.

, , , -, , . :

-. I. , , , I . . 3852 I . - - , I, - , . . , I.

: , .

3.2.2.

, .5 , - , , , , - .

, - .

- . , -, .65 , .

- , . .

10

-

3.2.2.1. :

, - , -, () , ( )13. - , , , - , - 2 : , . - . , , .

- , . .61 , , , -. : . .61 .67 14. , , .

, . ( 2004 ) , -- , , - ( ). , .

, - -

13 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Area of freedom, security and Justice: Assessment of Tampere programme and future orientations, COM (2004) 401 final, p. 11.

14 10107/04, JUSTCIV 80, Brussels 4 June 2004. Meijknecht, 2005, . 223231.

11

.

, . - , .

- - . - -15. , , , -, .

3.2.2.2.,

- , 16. 2005 -. , , . - . -, , - , , . 17. , , , . , - -, - , .

15 Although, already in 2002, the Netherlands mentioned that a special debt enforcement procedure was a necessity. See Kamerstukken II, 20022003, 22 112, No. 275, p. 2. Until now, such a procedure has not been realised.

16 Regulation EC No. 4/2009, OJ 2009, L 7/1 of 18 December 2008: On jurisdiction, applicable law, the recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance.

17 This provision showed a great deal of similarity with the proposals contained in the Green Paper on improving the efficiency of the enforcement of judgments in the EU: the attachment of bank accounts. Keeping in mind what happened with the provisions in the Regulation on maintenance, one can imagine what is going to happen with the proposals in the Green Paper.

12

-

3.3.

3.3.1.

- - . - , - . .

, --. , , - .

- , . , 18. , corpusalienum 19.

- 20. - , , . -, , , -, .

, , . -, - - . , -, , , - - .

18 The remedy of review has now also been implemented for the Regulations for a European order for payment and the Small claims procedure. The remedy of review is included in the respective Dutch implementing statutes of the regulations.

19 The implementation of the special remedy of review is even more important because a Member State can only certify a judgment as a European Enforcement Order if the debtor can apply, under certain circumstances, for review.

20 COM (2006) 618 final, Brussels, 24 October 2006.

13

.

, , -, . - , - . , , - -, , , .

3.3.2.

- , . -- , , .

3.3.2.1.

- .3 . - . 1 .3 . :

, , , , - , - .

Mahnverfahren ( , ). Mahnverfahren , . -, , , . , , , . 1 .3 , .

- 2008 . - , , - -

14

-

, Mahnverfahren. .6 , , , - . , - , , , , , .

, - , --, , ( , ).

3.3.2.2.19:

. .19 -, - . , - - . - . -, III . 19 . . 19 , , , - . , -- ? - . , , , 21.

21 Commercial Court of Hasselt, 1 February 2006 and JugedePaix Heist-op-den Berg, 2 March 2006, .

15

.

3.3.3. -

, , , - . , , (acteclair) (acteclair), - .

3.3.3.1. ,(Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss),

1 .4 . . - , - -, : , , - , .

.32 I. , , - (Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss), (einstweiligeVerf-gung), , 22.

, Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss , , -. . , . - Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss . , .

, - . , , , - .13 14 . -, .17 -

22 Voorzieningenrechter Court of First Instance s-Hertogenbosch, 24 August 2007, LJN: BB2320.

16

-

. .18 , , 23. , .b 1 .3 . , (einstweiligeVerfgung), , , .3 .

I. . , , , . - .

3.3.3.2.:.6

, , .6. - . , , - . , - , , - , 24.

.6 , - , , , -, , . -, , .

4.

, , - , 1999 ,

23 According to German law, the Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss in this situation is rendered separately from the decision in the einstweilige Verfgung and there is no provision to provide due information to the debtor about the possibility to contest the claim. See Bittmann 2009, p. 369372.

24 Court of First Instance Utrecht, 21 November 2007, LJN: BB8301 and idem, 23 January 2008, LJN: BC3119, Postbank N.V./X.

17

.

, , - . - ? , , - ? , , - , -- 15 27 ?

, : , , , - . , . I . , , - 300 . , . , - , , - .

- , - -. .

18

-

Bittmann 2009Bittmann D.-C. Der Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss nach 104 ZPO als Europischer Vollstreckungstitel // Rechtspfleger, 2009, . 369372.

Meijknecht 2005Meijknecht P.A.M. Europees procesrecht alleen voor grensoverschrijdende zak-en? // R.J.C. Flach e.a. (red.), Amice (Rutgers-bundel), Deventer: Kluwer, 2005, .223231.

Stadler 2004Stadler A. Das Europische Zivilprozessrecht Wieviel Beschleunigung vertrgt Europa? //IPRax, 2004, . 311.