Activities of Ingeborg GRÄSSLE related to 2017/2139(DEC)
Reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016, Section IV – Court of Justice PDF (410 KB) DOC (71 KB)
Amendments (14)
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Criticises the Court for refusing access for the Court of Auditors to allsome of the documents relevant in auditthey requested for of the performance review of the CJEU and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents; reminds the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6 Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecy.
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the référendaires are very influential within the CJEU but that their role and the rules governing their conduct remain unknown to the outside world; notes that référendaires are selected by the Members for whom they will work and that there are minimum recruitment criteria; calls on the CJEU to implement a policy allowing for a more flexible allocation of existing référendaires to help mitigate problems;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Notes with concern that the CJEU could not evaluate the capacity of judges and référendaires managing cases because the CJEU does not collect any information on the amount of time a judge or a référendaire spent on a case; notes that a study will be carried out in order to evaluate the extent to which the introduction of a system for monitoring the use of resources would provide useful data; asks the CJEU to present the results of the study to the European Parliament;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Considers the answer given by the CJEU to Parliament’s question (Question 50) on the costs of their cases to be unsatisfactory; asks the CJEU to consider a monitoring system to calculate the costs of each case;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15 c. Notes the permanent monitoring of the evolution of potential backlog and delays within chambers; regrets that the CJEU has not reported to Parliament on data relating to the failure to comply with indicative time frames because it concerns the internal organisation of the Courts;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15 d. Notes with concern that one of the most frequent factors affecting the duration of the handling of cases are judicial vacations1a; notes that there were 14 weeks of judicial vacations in 2016; asks the greffier to propose solutions to the European Parliament; _________________ 1a See ECA Special report no 14/2017: Performance review of case management at the Court of Justice of the European Union, p. 31
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15 e. Is concerned that the reception and processing of procedural documents by the registry is the most frequent factor affecting the duration of the written procedure at the General Court1a; notes that the cases before the General Court are notably characterised by the volume of the documents; calls on the General Court to further monitor the number and complexity of cases in order to ensure that the registry has sufficient resources; _________________ 1a See ECA Special report no 14/2017: Performance review of case management at the Court of Justice of the European Union, p. 27
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)
Paragraph 15 f (new)
15 f. Underlines the recommendation of the Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 14/2017 to measure performance on a case by case basis by reference to a tailored time-frame, taking account of the actual resources employed;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes the process for assigning cases referred to the Courts; notes that in 2016, as in the previous years, around 40% of cases in the General Court were assigned outside of the rota system, which puts the system itself into question; asks the CJEU to provide the rules stipulating the procedure of assignment in both Courts;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes the CJEU’s investment in IT tools to improve case management; asks the CJEU to provide detailed financial information on and the state of play of IT projects within the CJEU since 2014; calls on the CJEU to develop a fully integrated IT system to support case management;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Notes that the CJEU followed up on the Parliament’s recommendation on the use of official vehicles in the 2015 discharge resolution in a phased manner; finds that the actions taken to rationalise the management of the fleet go in the right direction; welcomes the new interinstitutional call for tender on car leasing procurement procedure launched in 2016 which aims to provide economic savings in this regard; notes with concern that in 2016, 21 flights were arranged at a cost of EUR 3 998,97 in order to send drivers on mission to chauffeur members of the Court of Justice or of the Tribunal in the home Member States of those members;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Notes that the nomination of the Members of the European Court of Justice is the responsibility of the Member States under Article 253 TFEU; highlights the importance of the timely nomination and appointment of Judges for the performance of the CJEU; asks for a new rule setting a specific deadline for the (re)nomination of a judge well before the end of a judge’s mandate and calls on the Council to respect the cost- benefit-ratio when appointing new judges to the CJEU; criticises the irregular nomination without a call for applications of two judges for the Tribunal of First Instance for a mandate which moreover lasted only from 14 April 2016 until 31 August 2016; notes with regret the costs of the taking up and the ending of one of the "4 month mandates" to the amount of EUR 69 498,25 in addition to the salary the judge received; condemns such a waste of EU taxpayers money;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29 b. Notes furthermore that the General Court (Appeal Chamber, judgment of 23 January 2018 in Case T- 639/16 P)1a considers the Second Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union with one of the"4 month mandate" judges as an irregular one, which makes void this and all further legal acts of the Second Chamber in that composition; asks the CJEU which legal acts of the Second Chamber in that composition are affected by the General Court ruling; demands that the Council comments on this failure and clarifies who takes responsibility for this; _________________ 1a ECLI:EU:T:2018:22.
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)
Paragraph 29 c (new)
29 c. Asks the CJEU to consider extending the languages of deliberation of the CJEU, in particular the General Court, to languages other than French; welcomes the request of the President of the General Court in February 2016 for an impact assessment of a change of the language of deliberation that has not yet been finalized;