training of national judges info day introduction to the new call for proposals 2014 raffaella...
TRANSCRIPT
Training of National Judges
INFO DAY
Introduction to the new Call for Proposals 2014
Raffaella Battella - DG Competition
Structure of the presentation
1. General intro to the Programme
2. Call for Proposals 2014
3. Statistics on selected projects 2013
1.Why is DG COMPETITION involved in a programme of DG JUSTICE?
Main aim of the Justice Programme is to create an European justice culture
Our specific field: competition lawYou find us at section 2.2.2 of the Annual Work Programme of DG JUSTICE
Budget for 2014: 1.000.000 €
Nationalities of Judges trained on EU competition law 2007-2013
What we finance:
• Measures promoting training in EU competition law for national judges and cooperation between them (organisation of conferences, short or long-term training, the distribution of documentation and information on EU competition law specifically tailored to the needs of national judges etc.)
• Projects must cover the implementation of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU and/or state aid rules and may include private enforcement
• We finance up to 80% of the total eligible costs of the projects.
Target audience
• "Judicial staff"• Judges• Prosecutors• Judicial court staff• Bailiffs• Notaries• Mediators
• One or several professions• Participants from one or several Member States
(or acceding country)• In initial (induction period) or continuous training
2. Ongoing Call for Proposal 2014
• Date of publication:27 May 2014 (all languages)• Deadline for applications: 29 August 2014• Budget: 1.000.000 (8-12 projects)
Priority areas• Improvement of knowledge, application and interpretation of EU
competition law;• Support to National Judicial Institutions on Competition Law
knowledge;• Improving and/or creating cooperation/networks;• Residual* funding for linguistic trainings
Evaluation Process There should be at ideally 3 experts to evaluate each proposal
Proposal 1
Proposal 1
Proposal 1
Draft Score Table
Draft Score Table
Draft Score Table
1° Evaluation Committe
Final Score Table+
Evaluation summary
report
Final Score Table+
Evaluation summary report
Final Score Table+
Evaluation summary report
2° Evaluation Committee
Final ranking meeting
The 5 Award criteria to assess1. RELEVANCE (30 points) 2. QUALITY (30 points) 5. COST EFFECTIVENESS (20
points)
a) The extent to which the proposal matches the objectives of the call (10 points)
a) Are the methodology (approach, detail and specificity of the proposed activities, quality of the speakers, monitoring systems, marketing strategies etc.) and the timeframe suitable to achieve the desired outcome of the project? (10 points)
a) Is the forward budget reasonable, given the expected results and in terms of cost per day of one trained judge (10 points)?
b) The extent to which the proposal matches the requirement of an European added value announced in section 2.1 (10 points)
b) Are the proposed activities suitably designed for the expected audience (10 points)?
b) Do the costs allocated in each section of the budget represent a good value for money in respect to the average market price (10 points)?
c) The extent to which the proposal matches the priority areas set in the call and is tailored for national judges (by role, function, seniority) (10 points)
c) To what extent the design of the projects allows achieving its goals (balanced distribution of tasks, best choice of expertise etc.) (10 points)?
4.DISSEMINATION (10 points)
5. GEOGRAPHICALL SCOPE (10 points)
a) Are there effective plans put in place for appropriate and timely disseminations/sharing of results? (5 points)
a) How wide is the geographical impact - in terms of expected results - of the project (based on variety of nationalities involved in terms of participants, targeted group and/or partnership)? (5 points)
b) Are the results likely to have a sustainable impact? (5 points)
b) Extra points will be awarded to projects involving nationalities less reached by previous projects funded under the Training of National Judges on Competition Law Programme .(5 points)
+
To qualify for an award, the project must obtain at least 60 out of 100 points and at least 50 % of the points available for criteria 1, 2 and 5.
Final Ranking panel meeting
Remote Evaluations
10 – 14 September 2014
De
ad
line
25/09/2014
Kick off remote briefing
09/09/2014
Co
mp
leti
ng
Ev
alu
atio
n
1° Evaluation Committee
meeting
15/09/2014
2° Evaluation Committee
meeting
25/09/2014
Evaluation process CFP2014
A good application is• Targeting the right audience (apprentice judges or
senior? Fist instance or supreme courts?)• Focus on specific and real-based (survey, study
etc) training needs (general or specific)• Strong partnership (Ministry, Judicial Academies,
Courts etc)• Well planned (preparation + marketing +
implementation + dissemination/sustainability)• Producing long lasting results (network, database,
pubblications etc)
3. Awarded Projects (after adjustments) in 2013
Country TotalDE 1ES 2EU 2HU 1IT 1NL 1PT 2(blank)Grand Total 10
Proposals received in 2013 (21) Country TotalBG 1DE 1ES 3EU 2FR 1HU 1IT 4NL 2PT 3RO 1SK 1UK 1Grand Total 21
Success rate
Nationality of Applicants
Number of Applications by Nationality X
Percentage of Applications by Nationality (x/21)
How many applications are Ranked by nationality(Above 60 points)
Percentage of applications that are Ranked by nationality (Above 60 points)
How many applications are awarded by nationality
Percentage awarded by nationality (top score within budget)
Bulgaria 1 4.76% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Germany 2 9.52% 2 100.00% 2 100.00%Spain 3 14.29% 2 66.67% 2 66.67%France 1 4.76% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Hungary 1 4.76% 1 100.00% 1 100.00%Italy 5 23.81% 3 60.00% 2 40.00%Netherlands 2 9.52% 2 100.00% 1 50.00%Portugal 3 14.29% 3 100.00% 2 66.67%Romania 1 4.76% 1 100.00% 0 0.00%Slovakia 1 4.76% 1 100.00% 0 0.00%United Kingdom 1 4.76% 1 100.00% 0 0.00%
Total 21 100.00% 16 10
Judges distribution (by nationality)
Austria (1995)
Belgium (1952)
Bulgaria (2007)
Cyprus (2004)
Czech Republic (2004)
Denmark (1973)
Estonia (2004)
Finland (1995)
France (1952)
Germany (1952)
Greece (1981.)
Hungary (2004)
Ireland (1973)
Italy (1952)
Latvia (2004)
Lithuania (2004)
Luxembourg (1952)
Malta (2004)
Netherlands (1952)
Poland (2004)
Portugal (1986)
Romania (2007)
Slovakia (2004)
Slovenia (2004)
Spain (1986)
Sweden (1995)
United Kingdom (1973)
Croatia
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
189 13
4 70
1218 15
79
7
22
815
8
19
4 4
17
28
139
23
7 10
113
713
5
Estimated Number of Judges Trained by Nationality
Total number of Projects funded: 10
Estimated amount of judges trained: 744
Looking for a partner?
Send to us the relevant info and we will put them on our dedicated section online!
Would you like to have a special Info day organised on your
country?
Contact us!
