Adopting the Comitology Procedure

Law
Page 1

Table of Contents
A) The Commission adopted the contested regulation by the ‘regulatory procedure with scrutiny’
(the Comitology procedure), a procedure no longer used following the Lisbon Treaty. If the
measure were to be adopted today, should the act should be adopted as a Commission delegated
act, a Commission implementing the act, or using the ordinary legislative procedure. Give your
reasons.............................................................................................................................................3
B) Article 340(2) TFEU provides: ‘In the case of non-contractual liability, the Union shall, in
accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States, make good
any damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties.’ Is the
test for engaging the responsibility of the Union too difficult for an individual, such as Marc Bel,
to meet in order to gain compensation for damage suffered? Support your answer by reference to
case law............................................................................................................................................6
C) What was the legal procedure used by the City of Paris to bring its action against the
Commission? What was the procedural issue in the case? Why did the City of Paris seek to reply
to the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations?.....................................................8
D) In order to ensure the health and well-being of EU citizens is protected with regard to air
pollution, should the national parliaments, European Parliament, Council of Ministers or
Commission be given greater powers? Give your reasons. (One-quarter marks).........................11
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................15
Page 2

A) The Commission adopted the contested regulation by the ‘regulatory procedure
with scrutiny’ (the Comitology procedure), a procedure no longer used following the
Lisbon Treaty. If the measure were to be adopted today, should the act should be
adopted as a Commission delegated act, a Commission implementing the act, or
using the ordinary legislative procedure. Give your reasons.
This question aims to identify the ways through which the measure of the ‘regulatory
procedure with scrutiny’ (The Comitology Procedure) should be adopted as a Commission
delegated act.
Since the UK is a constitutional monarchy, the Head of the State holds the legislative
power. In this context, these powers are identified as ceremonial, formal, and non-political.
Additionally, the Head of the State is a major body, which grants approval of legislation through
the House of the Parliament. It also has the power to appoint the Prime Minister of the nation as
well as the Ministers of the Crown. Title and honors to the members are also granted by the Head
of the State. In addition, Head of the State acts as a neutral party for making decisions as a
neutral party to serve justice. Moreover, it is the Prime Minister who advices the Head of the
State to use this legislative power1.
During the year 2017, a proposal of the Comitology procedure was further initiated by
the European Commission after amending major areas within the procedure for making it more
effective along with creating an appealing committee. This amendment was made so that it
would be easier to rule cases through this procedure. This was not enough to convince or
increase the probability of approval by the Members of the State. Involvement of the European
1Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons, ‘The UK Constitution’ (2015) PCRC 7
Page 3

Parliament under this procedure was further recommended2. Unlike the past measures and power
held by the Commission, the legislative power structure in the present scenario is not balanced.
This is due to the fact that the legislative powers such as the right of drafting legislation and the
right to control the secondary legislation have been highly prioritized at the present unlike in the
past. Moreover, the shift with respect to the power of drafting the legislation and controlling it
has been transferred from the Members of the State as well as from the Parliament at present.
This shift of power can be identified as one of the ways through which the measure of the
‘regulatory procedure with scrutiny’ (The ComitologyProcedure) should be adopted as a
Commission delegated act. Administration as well as the political bodies has taken in charge of
controlling the Commission. Thus, legislative structure at present is more of a nuisance, as many
reforms along with the development of a stronger administration have been initiated under the
context of the EU3.
Introducing the Comitology procedure by the Council during the year 2006, the
Regulative Procedure of Scrutiny (RPS) was integrated into the procedure. This procedure was
then considered to be legal as the reformed measures involved ‘quasi-legislative measures’. In
this context, Quasi-legislative measures further focused on supporting several acts involved
under the ordinary legislative procedure. Being forced under the Lisbon Treaty, the RPS was not
used since the year 2009, even though it covers vast legislative measures. This did not involve by
alignment of the procedures in it. Same measures to be implemented again were never possible
so the alignment of every legislative procedure was necessary for the Lisbon Treaty to display a
major distinction between the implementing act and delegated act. Keeping the alignment aside,
an initiative of reforming previous acts used under the Lisbon Treaty within the RPS is still being
2PotzschUrs, ‘Comitology Reform 2017, Why We Need to Include the European Parliament as well as the Council’
[2017] CEP 3
3Gueguen Daniel, ‘Comitology Hijacking, European Power’ [2014] PACT18
Page 4