Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 1896

LTStraipsnyje analizuojamas 2006 m. gruodžio 12 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentas (EB) Nr. 1896/2006, nustatantis Europos mokėjimo įsakymo procedūrą. Aptariama šio teisės akto reguliavimo sritis, Europos mokėjimo įsakymo išdavimo tvarka ir jo privalumai, taip pat skolininko teisių gynimo būdai. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Europos mokėjimo įsakymas; Skolininko teisės; European Union; European order for payment; Rights of the debtors; Europos Sąjunga (European Union).

ENThe article thoroughly examines the Regulation, creating a European order for payment procedure, which is applied in all Member States, except Denmark, from 12l h of December 2008. The Regulation should help to recover swiftly and efficiently uncontested claims in cross-border cases, because the exequatur procedure has been abolished for the enforceable European payment order. According to the author, the scope of the Regulation could have been even wider. The term cross-border case could have been explained wider, including cases, where the assets of a debtor are in other Member State. Also non-contractual obligations could have been included in the scope of the Regulation more extensively. It is emphasized that the application of the Regulation only to the crossborder cases restrain the rights of the persons from the Member Stares, which do not have procedure to issue payment order in the national laws. It is stressed in the article that the procedure es; tablishcd by the Regulation is an additional one and a plaintiff is always free to choose a procedure provided for by national law. It is also possible for a creditor to ask to certify a judgement as European Enforcement Order. The procedure to get European payment order should be quite easy for all creditors, because it is based, to the largest extent possible, on the use of standard forms in any communication between the court and the parties. The author thinks that such forms make the procedure not expensive, while the parties essentially do not need lawyers, the costs for the translation should be also minimal. According to the author it is important that the debtor has to defend his interests only in the Member State, in which European order for payment is issued. Such legal regulation makes the procedure much more predictable, it is almost not possible to have different proceedings in different Member States.The debtor only can in very limited cases to ask the court in the Member State of enforcement to limit or stay enforcement procedure. The ground for such request is the application to review the European order for payment in exceptional cases in the Member State of origin. [From the publication]