Traduction de «Décision administrative » (Français → Anglais) :

6. Notes with concern that as in its previous reports, the Court of Auditors has noted the need to introduce a system of remuneration for services provided by Member States authorities, based on their real costs; regrets that no progress has been made on this issue since 2009, when a proposal for a new payment system was presented to the Management Board but no agreement was reached; notes that the Agency will present a new proposal for a new payment system to the Management Board in March 2013; acknowledges the efforts made by the Agency's executives to encourage a decision by the Management Board to revise the system of remuneration ...[+++] of Member States services based on real costs; is fully aware of the fact that the little progress made is due to the lack of decision taken by the Management Board; welcomes, therefore, the approach by the Agency's administration to call upon the Commission for further assistance in this matter; urges the Agency to inform the discharge authority about the developments on this issue, inter alia on the state of play as regards the new action plan and the Management Board's position on it;

31. Welcomes Decision 24/2011/GB of the Governing Board of the College of 15 June 2011 disbanding existing committees as of 1 January 2012, thus reducing the overlap between different structures; calls on the GB to take drastic decisions concerning the existing working groups; recalls that Article 10(10) of Decision 2005/681/JHA provides that the GB may decide, ‘in cases of strict necessity’, to establish working groups to make recommendations and to develop and propose any other advisory tasks deemed necessary by the GB;

Is the first sentence of Article 21g(2) of Law 241/1990, as interpreted by the administrative case-law — in relation to the obligation to state reasons for an administrative measure laid down by Article 3 of Law 241/1990 and by Sicilian Regional Law 10/1991, in conjunction with the obligation to state reasons for the acts of public authorities laid down by the second paragraph of Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the third indent of Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — compatible with Article 1 of Law 241/1990, which requires the administrative authorities to appl ...[+++]y the principles of European Union law, and, consequently, are the interpretation and application of that interpretation whereby the authorities may supplement a statement of reasons for an administrative measure in court proceedings compatible and admissible?

3. The Board shall adopt its Rules of Procedure by unanimous decision containing, inter alia, the provisions on the appointment and term of office of the Chair and of the members of the Executive Committee, the decision-making arrangements of the Board, the language arrangements, the tasks, organisation and resources of the Secretariat, and administrative arrangements for the cooperation with other entities as referred to in Article 8.

(9) The CECIS should be set up on the basis of a global implementation plan (GIP) as part of the PROCIV-NET project conducted and financed in the context of a programme for the interchange of data between administrations, the IDA programme as provided for in Decision No 1719/1999/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 12 July 1999 on a series of guidelines, including the identification of projects of common interest, for trans-European networks for the electronic interchange of data between administrations ...[+++] (IDA)(4), as last amended by Decision No 2046/2002/EC(5), and Decision No 1720/1999/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 1999 adopting a series of actions and measures in order to ensure interoperability of and access to trans-European networks for the electronic interchange of data between administrations (IDA)(6), as last amended by Decision No 2045/2002/EC(7).

8. Notes the Secretary-General's statement that at present no disciplinary proceedings are pending within Parliament's administration; welcomes the fact that on 1 December 1999, i.e. even before the deliberations on the discharge for 1998, the Bureau, at the proposal of the Secretary-General, started an administrative inquiry; notes the Bureau decision of 13 June 2000, in connection with the Frederiksen case, not to seek redress as provided for by Article 22 of the Staff Regulations; notes that this decision is based on the consideration that the admin ...[+++]istrative inquiry did not reveal evidence of "serious misconduct" by individuals as referred to in Article 22 of the Staff Regulations; points out, however, that the administrative inquiry revealed both problems with internal decision-making procedures and a tendency to neglect risks associated with court cases in relation to alleged considerations of "principle"; concludes from the course of events that it would have been appropriate to review the case and reappraise the risks associated with legal proceedings at a considerably earlier stage; recalls paragraph 23 of its above-mentioned resolution of 13 April 2000, calling on the Legal Service to inform the Bureau about the risks of court cases before the Bureau takes its decisions, particularly in the light of previous judgements on staff matters; welcomes the Bureau decision of 13 June 2000 instructing Vice-Presidents Lienemann and Provan to examine whether further internal administrative reforms are needed in order to avoid similar outcomes; instructs its Bureau to inform the competent committees about its conclusions on this matter;