Joined Cases T‑261/13 and T‑86/14

Kingdom of the Netherlands

v

European Commission

‛HICP — Regulation (EC) No 2494/95 — Harmonised indices of consumer prices at constant tax rates (HICP-CT) — Regulation (EU) No 119/2013 — Owner-occupied housing price indices — Regulation (EU) No 2494/95 — Eurostat — Comitology — Implementing measures — Regulatory procedure with scrutiny’

Summary — Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition), 23 September 2015

EU institutions — Exercise of powers — Implementing power conferred on the Commission for the adoption of implementing measures — Limits — Obligation to comply with the general objectives of the legislative act in question and adopt provisions necessary or useful for implementing that act — Scope — Implementation of a legislative act providing for use of the Regulatory procedure with scrutiny for the adoption of implementing measures — No recourse to such a procedure in the implementing measure — Not permissible

(Art. 291(2) TFEU; Council Regulation No 2494/95, Arts 4, second and third paras, 5(3), and 14(3); Commission Regulations No 93/2013, Art. 4(1), and No 119/2013, Art. 1, point 2; Council Decision 1999/468, Art. 5a)

When an implementing power is conferred on the Commission on the basis of Article 291(2) TFEU, the Commission is called on to provide further detail in relation to the content of the legislative act, in order to ensure that it is implemented under uniform conditions in all Member States. Moreover, within the framework of the Commission’s implementing power, the limits of which must be determined by reference amongst other things to the essential general aims of the legislative act in question, the Commission is authorised to adopt all the measures which are necessary or appropriate for the implementation of that act, provided that they are not contrary to it. Thus, the Commission must be deemed to have provided further detail in relation to the legislative act if the provisions of the implementing measure which it adopts comply with the essential general aims pursued by the legislative act and are necessary or appropriate for the implementation of that act.

The methodological frameworks provided for by Article 1, point 2, of Regulation No 119/3013 amending Regulation No 2214/96 concerning harmonised indices of consumer prices (HICP), and by Article 4(1) of Regulation No 93/2013 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation No 2494/95 concerning harmonised indices of consumer prices constitute measures which are necessary or useful for the implementation under uniform conditions of Regulation No 2494/95, since the provisions of those methodological frameworks are intended to establish concepts, methods and practices allowing for comparability of HICPs for the purposes of the second paragraph of Article 4 of Regulation No 2494/95 and therefore form part of the rules to be followed to ensure the comparability of HICPs, as provided for in the third paragraph of Article 4 and Article 5(3) of Regulation No 2494/95. Those methodological frameworks therefore constitute implementing measures which must be complied with in order to give practical effect to the applicable regulations and to ensure the comparability of HICPs.

Consequently, since the third paragraph of Article 4 and Article 5(3) of Regulation No 2494/95, read in combination with Article 14(3) of that regulation, provide that the Commission shall, in conformity with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny, as governed by Article 5a of Decision 1999/468 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, enact the implementing measures necessary to ensure the comparability of HICPs, Article 1, point 2, of Regulation No 119/2013 and Article 4(1) of Regulation No 93/2013 must be annulled in so far as they do not provide for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny for adopting the necessary implementing measures. The rules regarding the manner in which the EU institutions arrive at their decisions are laid down in the Treaty and are not at the disposal of the Member States or of the institutions themselves. To acknowledge that an institution can establish secondary legal bases, whether for the purpose of strengthening or easing the detailed rules for the adoption of an act, is tantamount to according that institution a legislative power which exceeds that provided for by the Treaty. It is also tantamount to enabling the institution concerned to undermine the principle of institutional balance which requires that each of the institutions must exercise its powers with due regard for the powers of the other institutions.

(see paras 38, 43-45, 47-50, 63, 64)