• In the case of Germany v European Parliament (C-233/94) [1997] 3 C.M.L.R. 1379, the main lesson from this case stated how the European Union’s decision-making process should be interpreted in light of the European Parliament’s authority and its connection to the Council of the European Union.

The key points from this case are:

  • The European Parliament has the authority to take part in the EU’s legislative process, as well as to receive information from and be consulted by the EU Council.
  • The Council of the European Union and the European Parliament must work together in good faith to pass legislation.
  • The Council of the European Union has a responsibility to explain its decisions to the European Parliament.
  • The European Parliament has the authority to take the necessary steps to guarantee that the European Union Council upholds its authority and duties.

Facts of the Case:

  • The validity of the Council of the European Union’s decision to enact the measures for the founding of the European Central Bank was contested in a lawsuit initiated by Germany against the European Parliament.
  • In the absence of the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union accepted the measures pertaining to the establishment of the European Central Bank.
  • Germany asserted that the exclusion of the European Parliament from the decision-making process infringed its rights under the Treaty on European Union and that the European Parliament had a right to be heard during the legislative process.
  • The European Parliament said that despite being notified of the measures’ intended adoption by the Council of the European Union, it was not involved in the legislative process.

Issues in Germany v European Parliament (C-233/94) [1997] 3 C.M.L.R. 1379:

  • The primary question in the case was whether the European Parliament had the right to be involved in the EU’s legislative process. 
  • The legality of the Council of the European Union’s decision to enact the measures pertaining to the establishment of the European Central Bank was the second point of contention.

Held by Court:

  • The European Court of Justice ruled that the European Parliament had a right to take part in the legislative process of the European Union and that by not doing so, it was infringing on those rights underneath the Treaty on European Union.

Judgment:

  • The European Court of Justice ruled that the European Parliament had a right to be heard throughout the EU’s legislative process and that its exclusion from the decision-making process infringed upon such rights under the EU Treaty. 
  • The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union must work together in good faith during the legislative process, the court said, and the European Parliament has a right to be informed by the Council of the European Union of the reasons for its choices. 
  • The court ruled that the European Parliament has the authority to take the necessary steps to make sure that the European Union Council abided by its commitments and power.

Editor’s Notes:

  • In the framework of the European Union’s decision-making process, this case is significant for the interpretation of the competences of the European Parliament and its connection with the Council of the European Union. 

Study Law in the UK

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.