The present contribution explores the approach of the court of justice of european union towards the review of discretionary decisions adopted by the european union (eu) administration. The analysis shows that the review of the european courts on the discretionary choices of the eu administration revolves around the concept of ‘manifest error’. This term has acquired a different meaning throughout time, evolving from a very light review towards a deeper review, entailing an examination of whether the factual basis of a decision justifies the outcome of the decision itself. Furthermore, whenever the eu authorities are vested with the discretionary powers to weigh conflicting interests, the control of the european courts is exercised both through the tool of ‘manifest error’ and through the proportionality review. This review is relatively limited and will lead to a finding of unlawfulness only in cases of serious flaws.
|Series||Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law|