—

having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),

—

having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 — C7-0214/2010) (2),

—

having regard to the Court of Justice’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,

—

having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

—

having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (4),

—

having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

—

having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0137/2011),

1.

Notes that in 2009 the Court of Justice had commitment appropriations available amounting to a total of EUR 318 000 000 (EUR 297 000 000 in 2008), with a utilisation rate of 98,50 %, which is above the average of the other institutions (97,69 %);

2.

Notes that in the course of preparation of the annual report concerning the financial year 2009, the Court of Auditors performed an in-depth assessment of supervisory and control systems in the Court of Justice, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, which included the examination of an additional sample of transactions involving payments relating to human resources and to other administrative expenditure;

3.

Notes that the Court of Auditors’ in-depth assessment at the Court of Justice related to a random sample of 54 transactions covering a wide range of the activities and departments of the Court of Justice, representing a substantial part of its annual budget, and that assessment had broadly positive results;

4.

Notes that the Court of Auditors indicated in its annual report that the Court of Justice failed to anticipate the expiry of a framework contract, and ordered services amounting to EUR 102 000 without applying competitive procurement procedures; also recalls for the financial year 2008, the observations of the Court of Auditors, concerning a contract concluded for the provision of services, highlighted weaknesses in the internal control system for performing this tendering procedure and breach of the Financial Regulation and of its Implementing Rules (6);

5.

Takes note of the Court of Justice’s reply and its motives; endorses, however, the suggestion of the Court of Auditors that procurement procedures should be better prepared and coordinated;

6.

Notes that apart from the comments on the abovementioned contract concluded for the provision of services, the annual report of the Court of Auditors did not point out any other observations as regards the Court of Justice;

7.

Commends the Court of Auditors’ observation that the Court of Justice’s supervisory and control systems relating to the management and payment of remuneration and allowances are, in general, capable of discovering any errors or irregularities;

8.

Notes with satisfaction the effective operation of the Court of Justice’s Internal Audit Unit, that it monitors the action taken on recommendations made in audits carried out in previous years, and that its recommendations were duly put into operation; notes that two audits were carried out in 2009: an internal audit on management of interpreting and of expenditure in relation to external interpreters, and an internal audit on works of art; given the particular difficulties in the sphere of interpretation, invites the Court of Justice to follow-up on the action taken;

9.

Welcomes the increase in the number of cases completed by the Court of Justice (377 judgments and 165 orders compared to 333 and 161 respectively in 2008), and takes note of the number of preliminary ruling cases being the highest ever (302); however, notes that in 2009 the number of cases submitted has decreased in comparison to 2008 (561 instead of 592); notes that the duration of the proceedings was practically unchanged, and welcomes the decrease in the number of cases pending at the end of 2009 (741 cases compared to 768 cases at the end of 2008);

10.

Notes with concern that the General Court in 2009 showed a decrease in the number of cases decided and an increase of the duration of the proceedings and that consequently, although the number of new cases in 2009 was lower (568 new cases compared to 629 in 2008), the backlog of pending cases continued to increase (from 1 178 in 2008 to 1 191 in 2009);

11.

Welcomes the fact that the Civil Service Tribunal closed more cases than ever before (155 cases), and that the average duration of a procedure was 15,1 months compared to 17 months in 2008, as a result the number of pending cases continues to decrease (from 217 in 2008 to 175 in 2009), while the number of new applications remains almost constant (113 in 2009 compared to 111 in 2008);

12.

Welcomes the ongoing successful cooperation in the sphere of training with other institutions and with the European Administrative School, as well as effective interinstitutional cooperation in development and installation of the integrated management system;

13.

Takes note of the modernisation of the Court of Justice’s work methods, in particular the computerisation of the Registry of the Court of Justice, where the Paper Register dating back to 1952 has finally been replaced by an Electronic Register; urges the Court of Justice to report on the progress in introduction of other IT developments, for instance, the ‘e-curia’ application, in its upcoming annual reports;

14.

Notes the difficulties the Court of Justice experienced as regards recruitment of qualified conference interpreters, and the limitations as well as the need to use a range of interpretation techniques in order to be able to qualitatively and quantitatively satisfy all requests for interpretation; given the importance of interpretation for proper functioning of judicial work, invites the Court of Justice to report on this in its upcoming annual reports;

15.

Commends good interinstitutional cooperation on buildings, security, environmental protection and administrative management; invites the Court of Justice to provide more information on the outcome of the analysis as regards the needs not met by buildings from the perspective of 2014, and the resulting report, as well as the Court of Justice buildings policy in general;

16.

Welcomes the practice established by the Court of Justice of including in its Annual Activity Report a chapter outlining the follow-up during the year to Parliament’s previous discharge decisions and to reports of the Court of Auditors.