eu-charter

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Article 41 - Right to good administration

Article 41 - Right to good administration

1. Every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union.
2. This right includes:
(a) the right of every person to be heard, before any individual measure which would affect him or her adversely is taken;
(b) the right of every person to have access to his or her file, while respecting the legitimate interests of confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy;
(c) the obligation of the administration to give reasons for its decisions.
3. Every person has the right to have the Union make good any damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States.4. Every person may write to the institutions of the Union in one of the languages of the Treaties and must have an answer in the same language.

  • Text:

    Article 41 is based on the existence of the Union as subject to the rule of law whose characteristics were developed in the case-law which enshrined inter alia good administration as a general principle of law (see inter alia Court of Justice judgment of 31 March 1992 in Case C-255/90 P Burban [1992] ECR I-2253, and Court of First Instance judgments of 18 September 1995 in Case T-167/94 Nölle [1995] ECR II-2589, and 9 July 1999 in Case T-231/97 New Europe Consulting and others [1999] ECR II-2403). The wording for that right in the first two paragraphs results from the case-law (Court of Justice judgment of 15 October 1987 in Case 222/86 Heylens [1987] ECR 4097, paragraph 15 of the grounds, judgment of 18 October 1989 in Case 374/87 Orkem [1989] ECR 3283, judgment of 21 November 1991 in Case C-269/90 TU München [1991] ECR I-5469, and Court of First Instance judgments of 6 December 1994 in Case T-450/93 Lisrestal [1994] ECR II-1177, 18 September 1995 in Case T-167/94 Nölle [1995] ECR II-2589) and the wording regarding the obligation to give reasons comes from Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (cf. also the legal base in Article 298 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for the adoption of legislation in the interest of an open, efficient and independent European administration).

    Paragraph 3 reproduces the right now guaranteed by Article 340 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
    Paragraph 4 reproduces the right now guaranteed by Article 20(2)(d) and Article 25 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In accordance with Article 52(2) of the Charter, those rights are to be applied under the conditions and within the limits defined by the Treaties.

    The right to an effective remedy, which is an important aspect of this question, is guaranteed in Article 47 of this Charter.

    Source:
    Official Journal of the European Union C 303/17 - 14.12.2007
    Preamble - Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights:
    These explanations were originally prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Although they do not as such have the status of law, they are a valuable tool of interpretation intended to clarify the provisions of the Charter.
  • European Commission v Hungary
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2020:1
  • HUNGEOD Közlekedésfejlesztési, Földmérési, Út- és Vasúttervezési Kft. and Others v Közbeszerzési Hatóság Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2019:1002
  • Google Ireland Limited v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Adó- és Vámigazgatósága.
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    Taxation
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2019:728
  • Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority, Oy Matkahuolto Ab, the Finnish Bus and Coach Association and seven coach companies; appeal against the decision of the Market Court
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    National Court/Tribunal
    Deciding body:
    Supreme Administrative Court
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Competition
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:FI:KHO:2019:98
  • European Commission v Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo sp. z o.o.
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    Economic and monetary affairs
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2019:569
  • Constantin Film Produktion GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2019:553
  • OZ v European Investment Bank
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Third Chamber
    Type:
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2019:289
  • RK v Council of European Union
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Second Chamber
    Type:
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:T:2019:65
  • RY v European Commission
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition
    Type:
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:T:2019:1
  • RY v European Commission
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Ninth Chamber
    Type:
    Policy area:
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:T:2019:1

0 results found

0 results found

0 results found

0 results found