BETA

Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage



2011/0901(COD) Court of Justice: statute (amend. Protocol and Annex I)
RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Opinion AFCO MESSERSCHMIDT Morten (EFD)
Opinion BUDG WERTHMANN Angelika (NI)
Lead JURI THEIN Alexandra (ALDE) ZWIEFKA Tadeusz (EPP), MASIP HIDALGO Antonio (S&D), LICHTENBERGER Eva (Verts/ALE), ZIOBRO Zbigniew (ECR), MAŠTÁLKA Jiří (GUE/NGL), SPERONI Francesco Enrico (EFD)
Lead committee dossier: JURI/7/05776

Activites

  • 2012/07/05 Vote scheduled
  • 2012/07/04 Debate scheduled
  • 2012/06/05 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
    • A7-0185/2012
  • 2012/05/31 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • #3132
  • 2011/12/05 Council Meeting
  • 2011/11/29 Committee draft report
  • 2011/09/30 Document attached to the procedure
    • COM(2011)0596 summary
    • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/', 'title': 'Legal Service'}, BARROSO José Manuel
  • 2011/04/07 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • 2011/03/28 Legislative proposal
    • 02074/2011 summary
    • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/', 'title': 'Legal Service'}, BARROSO José Manuel

Documents

  • Legislative proposal published: 02074/2011
  • Document attached to the procedure: COM(2011)0596
  • Committee draft report: PE475.771
  • Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A7-0185/2012
AmendmentsDossier
47 2011/0901(COD)
2011/11/11 AFCO 32 amendments...
source: PE-475.880
2012/01/12 JURI 11 amendments...
source: PE-478.661
2012/02/02 AFCO 4 amendments...
source: PE-480.658

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

activities/7/type
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
New
Debate scheduled
activities/8
date
2012-07-05T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Vote scheduled
procedure/title
Old
Court of Justice: statute (amend.)
New
Court of Justice: statute (amend. Protocol and Annex I)
activities/6
date
2012-06-05T00:00:00
docs
type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0185/2012
body
EP
committees
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5/committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: AFCO date: 2011-07-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Constitutional Affairs rapporteur: group: EFD name: MESSERSCHMIDT Morten
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2011-09-28T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: NI name: WERTHMANN Angelika
  • body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: ZWIEFKA Tadeusz group: S&D name: MASIP HIDALGO Antonio group: Verts/ALE name: LICHTENBERGER Eva group: ECR name: ZIOBRO Zbigniew group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: EFD name: SPERONI Francesco Enrico responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2011-04-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
activities/5/type
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/2/body
Old
EP
New
EC
activities/2/commission
  • DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/2/date
Old
2012-01-10T00:00:00
New
2011-09-30T00:00:00
activities/2/docs
  • url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596 celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN type: Document attached to the procedure title: COM(2011)0596
activities/2/type
Old
Deadline Amendments
New
Document attached to the procedure
activities/3
date
2011-09-30T00:00:00
docs
url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596 title: COM(2011)0596 type: Document attached to the procedure celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN
body
EC
type
Document attached to the procedure
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/3/date
Old
2011-03-28T00:00:00
New
2011-11-29T00:00:00
activities/3/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
activities/3/type
Old
EP officialisation
New
Committee draft report
activities/4
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/8
body
EP
date
2012-06-13T00:00:00
type
EP 1R Plenary
activities/9
body
EC
date
2012-06-13T00:00:00
type
Prev DG PRES
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/8/type
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
New
EP 1R Plenary
activities/9
body
EC
date
2012-06-13T00:00:00
type
Prev DG PRES
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/10
date
2012-07-04T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
activities/8/date
Old
2012-06-12T00:00:00
New
2012-06-13T00:00:00
procedure/legal_basis
  • Euratom Treaty A 106-pa
  • Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 281-p2
activities/4
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/4/date
Old
2012-04-26T00:00:00
New
2011-11-29T00:00:00
activities/4/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
activities/4/type
Old
EP 1R Committee
New
Committee draft report
activities/7
body
EP
date
2012-04-26T00:00:00
type
EP 1R Committee
activities/8/date
Old
2012-04-26T00:00:00
New
2012-05-31T00:00:00
activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/4/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771
activities/7/type
Old
EP 1R Committee
New
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/7/type
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
EP 1R Committee
activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/4/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771
activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

activities/4/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771
activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
activities/4/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771
activities/7/date
Old
2012-05-22T00:00:00
New
2012-04-26T00:00:00
activities/7/type
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/8/date
Old
2012-03-27T00:00:00
New
2012-06-12T00:00:00
activities/8/type
Old
EP 1R Committee
New
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

activities/3/docs/0/text/0
Old

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur.

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

 

New

The Commission presents its Opinion on the requests for the amendment of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU, presented by the Court in two requests on 28 March 2011. The proposed amendments concern to varying degrees the three courts currently making up the Court of Justice of the European Union: the Court of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. The Court also proposes an amendment that would affect the three courts in the same way, namely dropping the provision on periods of grace based on considerations of distance, which would in fact result in the disappearance of the ten-day fixed period which is currently added to the procedural deadlines. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, these provisions should, for the first time, be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Court of Justice: the amendments are intended to:

  • establish the office of Vice-President of the Court and to determine the tasks to be entrusted to him/her;
  • modify the composition of the Grand Chamber;
  • increase the quorum for decisions by the Grand Chamber and the full Court;
  • abolish the reading at the hearing of the report presented by the Judge-Rapporteur. .

The Commission supports all the proposals made in relation to the Court of Justice, but suggests:

  • stating in which cases the President  of the Court can be replaced by the Vice-President;
  • ensuring more stability in the composition of the enlarged Grand Chamber. The Commission suggests a rule that three Presidents of Chambers of five Judges must always form part of this Grand Chamber. The Rules of Procedure would contain conditions governing the participation of judges in each case, probably involving a system of two rotating lists (instead of a single list as is the case at the moment): one consisting of the Presidents of the Chambers of five Judges and the second one consisting of the other judges.

The General Court: in order to cope with the increase in its caseload and the resulting increase in the time taken to handle cases, it is proposed that the number of judges be increased to 39. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments and proposals regarding:

  • the replacement of judges;
  • the number of specialised chambers, with a minimum of two;
  • the need for an office of Vice-President of the General Court, as proposed for the Court of Justice;
  • a transitional provision stating that the new judges will take up their posts immediately before their first six-year term has formally started, and . also determining the effective duration of terms of each new judge;

Civil Service Tribunal: the Court requests that it be assigned three temporary judges upon whom it could call in the event that a judge is prevented from attending for a long period of time. The Commission approves the amendments, subject to comments on the need to lay down the order in which the three temporary judges are required to undertake judicial duties when, in accordance with the conditions laid down, one of the member judges is unable to attend.

The Court proposes that in the event of the return of the judge who was absent, the Tribunal can decide on a discretionary basis that a temporary judge should continue to perform his duties until the cases in which he has been sitting are completed. The Commission has some criticism to make about this approach since it could weaken the independence of temporary judges given that the permanent judges with whom they work would decide whether or not they continue to perform their duties. For this reason, it considers that it would be more appropriate to adopt an objective criterion to determine the cases which the temporary judge would continue to handle even after the return of the judge he is replacing.

Amendments relating to all three Courts: lastly, the Court proposes dropping the  provision on the ten-day fixed period of grace based on considerations of distance on the grounds that it is no longer justified in this era of new technology. The Commission states that if the ten-day grace period is dropped, it would recommend extending some specific periods set down in the Statute, amongst them, the period set down for submitting written observations on cases referred to the Court of Justice, and the period for appealing against certain decisions of the General Court and of the Civil Service Tribunal.

activities/7/type
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
EP 1R Committee
activities/3/docs/0/url
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596
procedure/legal_basis/1
Old
TFEU 281-p2
New
Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 281-p2
activities/3
date
2011-09-30T00:00:00
docs
celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN type: Document attached to the procedure title: COM(2011)0596
body
EC
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
type
Document attached to the procedure
activities/3
date
2011-09-30T00:00:00
docs
url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596 celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN type: Document attached to the procedure title: COM(2011)0596
body
EC
type
Document attached to the procedure
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/3
date
2011-09-30T00:00:00
docs
url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=596 celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN type: Document attached to the procedure title: COM(2011)0596
body
EC
type
Document attached to the procedure
commission
DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
activities/3
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/4
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/3
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/3
date
2011-11-29T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/0
date
2011-03-28T00:00:00
docs
type: Legislative proposal title: 02074/2011
body
unknown
type
Legislative proposal
activities/1/type
Old
Legislative proposal published
New
Legislative proposal
activities/6
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/7
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
body
unknown
type
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/8
body
EP
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
type
Prev Adopt in Cte
activities/0/body
Old
 
New
unknown
activities/2/commission/0
DG
Commissioner
BARROSO José Manuel
activities/2/commission/0
DG
Legal Service
Commissioner
BARROSO José Manuel
activities/7
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
body
unknown
type
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/7
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
body
type
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
other/0
body
EC
dg
commissioner
BARROSO José Manuel
other/0
body
EC
dg
Legal Service
commissioner
BARROSO José Manuel
activities/8
body
EP
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
type
Prev Adopt in Cte
activities/8
body
EP
date
2012-03-27T00:00:00
type
EP 1R Committee
activities/10
body
EC
date
2012-05-22T00:00:00
type
Prev DG PRES
commission
DG: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
procedure/legal_basis/1
TFEU 281-p2
procedure/legal_basis/1
Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 281-p2
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/4
date
2011-09-30T00:00:00
docs
url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=0596 title: COM(2011)0596 type: Document attached to the procedure celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN
body
EC
commission
DG: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
type
Document attached to the procedure
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/1/rapporteur/0
group
NI
name
WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/3
date
2011-04-07T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=0596&model=guicheti
New
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=0596
committees/0/committee_full
Old
Constitutional Affairs
New
Constitutional Affairs
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2011-09-28T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: NI name: WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2011-09-28T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: NI name: WERTHMANN Angelika
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2011-04-12T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
activities
  • date: 2011-03-28T00:00:00 docs: type: Legislative proposal title: 02074/2011 body: type: Legislative proposal
  • body: EP date: 2011-03-28T00:00:00 type: EP officialisation
  • date: 2011-03-28T00:00:00 docs: type: Legislative proposal published title: 02074/2011 body: EC commission: DG: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel type: Legislative proposal published
  • date: 2011-04-07T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFCO date: 2011-07-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Constitutional Affairs rapporteur: group: EFD name: MESSERSCHMIDT Morten body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2011-09-28T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: NI name: WERTHMANN Angelika body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: ZWIEFKA Tadeusz group: S&D name: MASIP HIDALGO Antonio group: Verts/ALE name: LICHTENBERGER Eva group: ECR name: ZIOBRO Zbigniew group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: EFD name: SPERONI Francesco Enrico responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2011-04-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
  • date: 2011-09-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=0596&model=guicheti celexid: CELEX:52011DC0596:EN type: Document attached to the procedure title: COM(2011)0596 body: EC commission: DG: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel type: Document attached to the procedure
  • date: 2011-11-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE475.771 type: Committee draft report title: PE475.771 body: EP type: Committee draft report
  • date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: General Affairs meeting_id: 3132
  • body: EP date: 2012-01-10T00:00:00 type: Deadline Amendments
  • date: 2012-03-27T00:00:00 body: type: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • body: EP date: 2012-03-27T00:00:00 type: EP 1R Committee
  • date: 2012-05-22T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
  • body: EC date: 2012-05-22T00:00:00 type: Prev DG PRES commission: DG: Legal Service Commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: AFCO date: 2011-07-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Constitutional Affairs rapporteur: group: EFD name: MESSERSCHMIDT Morten
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2011-09-28T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: NI name: WERTHMANN Angelika
  • body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: ZWIEFKA Tadeusz group: S&D name: MASIP HIDALGO Antonio group: Verts/ALE name: LICHTENBERGER Eva group: ECR name: ZIOBRO Zbigniew group: GUE/NGL name: MAŠTÁLKA Jiří group: EFD name: SPERONI Francesco Enrico responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2011-04-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: THEIN Alexandra
links
other
  • body: EC dg: Legal Service commissioner: BARROSO José Manuel
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
JURI/7/05776
reference
2011/0901(COD)
instrument
Regulation
legal_basis
stage_reached
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
subtype
Legislation
title
Court of Justice: statute (amend.)
type
COD - Ordinary legislative procedure (ex-codecision)
subject
8.40.04 Court of Justice, Court of First Instance