1. The consultation provided for by article 24 of the merger treaty, which in particular enables the parliament effectively to participate in the community’s legislative process, is an essential feature of the institutional balance which the treaties seek to achieve. Regular consultation with the parliament before the adoption of a regulation amending the staff regulations of officials constitutes therefore an essential procedural requirement, the disregard of which renders the regulation in question void.
That requirement may be regarded as having been met when the regulation finally adopted conforms to the proposal submitted to the parliament, so long as changes made are of method rather than of substance.
2. Since the economic and social committee and the court of auditors are not shown in the treaties as institutions of the three communities it follows that consultation with the economic and social committee and the court of auditors is not mandatory when a regulation amending the staff regulations of officials is adopted. Although, according to the second paragraph of article 1 of the staff regulations, the economic and social committee and the court of auditors are treated as community institutions for the purposes of the staff regulations that treatment, the object of which is to ensure that the staff regulations are applied to the officials and other servants of those two bodies and to identify the appointing authority for those employees, does not however extend to the application of the provisions of the treaties, such as article 24 of the merger treaty, relating to the adoption of community regulations.
3. Discrimination consists of treating in an identical manner situations which are different or treating in a different manner situations which are identical. The situation of a serving official differs considerably from that of a pensioner, so that there is no discrimination in a case where the community legislature accords to pensioners treatment which is not identical to that applied to serving officials.
Citations:
C-828/79, [1982] EUECJ C-828/79
Links:
European, Constitutional
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132983
