52. The World Forum agreed to refer ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/34 (agenda item 4.6.1) back to GRSP for further consideration.

The decision to postpone was due to a European Commission identification of a possible inconsistency in text with regard to paragraph 5.3.8.2.

21. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4 aimed at exempting vehicles with one seating position per row from ISOFIX provisions. He justified that new concepts designed for urban mobility would not technically allow the installation of ISOFIX anchorages. The proposal received comments from the German expert (GRSP-53-11) arguing that the ISOFIX system should be promoted as much as possible in a broad range of vehicle configurations. The expert from OICA argued that GRSP-53-11 would not consider the consequences of vehicle weight increase (approximately 1 kg) and national legislation in several countries that forbid the transport of children on front seats. In principle, GRSP agreed to further study the ISOFIX requirements to address new mobility solutions. Thereby, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2013 session, based on comments (i.e. list of concept vehicle configurations) provided by the IWG on child restraints systems (CRS) and from the experts of Contracting Parties to the 1958 Agreement. Moreover, the secretariat was requested to distribute GRSP-53-11 with an official symbol and to have ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/9 as a reference on the agenda of the next session.