In a ruling handed down on Tuesday 25 February, the Court of Justice of the European Union recalled that “the receipt by judges of a level of remuneration commensurate with the importance of the functions they carry out constitutes a guarantee essential to their independence”.
Consequently, in laying down the detailed rules for determining judges’ remuneration, the Member States are required to comply with their obligations deriving from EU law. These rules must have a legal basis and be objective, foreseeable, stable and transparent, so as to exclude any arbitrary intervention by the legislative and executive powers.
The same requirements apply to derogating measures which lead to the reduction of judges’ remuneration or to the uprating of that remuneration being ‘frozen’.
In addition, the level of remuneration of judges must be sufficiently high, taking into account the economic, social and financial context of the Member State concerned, in particular in relation to the average salary, and “must be commensurate with the importance of the functions entrusted, in order to protect judges from any pressure liable to influence their decisions and to protect them against the risk of corruption”.
However, “judicial independence does not preclude their remuneration from being established at a level lower than that of the average remuneration of other legal professionals”, the Court also points out.
The matter was referred to the Court in 2024 by the Polish and Lithuanian courts, which questioned the compatibility of national provisions on determining judges’ remuneration with EU law, according to a press release.
In Poland, a law provides that the basic salary of judges is to be determined objectively, on the basis of the average salary. However, three periodic laws amended that method of calculation, resulting in a ‘freeze’ in the uprating of judges’ remuneration for the years 2021, 2022 and 2023 due to Covid-19 or the war in Ukraine.
In Lithuania, two judges brought an action for damages against their state, maintaining that the level of their remuneration directly depends on the political will of the executive and the legislature.
The Court emphasises that the principle of the independence of judges does not preclude “the legislative and executive authorities of a Member State from determining the remuneration of judges, provided that such determination is not the exercise of an arbitrary power but is based on procedures which: - are provided for by law; - are objective, predictable, stable and transparent; - ensure that judges receive a level of remuneration commensurate with the importance of the duties they perform, having regard to the economic, social and financial situation of the Member State concerned and the average salary in that Member State ; - may be subject to effective judicial review in accordance with the procedural rules laid down by the law of that Member State.
Nor does the principle of independence preclude the legislative and executive powers of a Member State from derogating from national rules, provided that any such derogation does not amount to the exercise of arbitrary power.
Derogations from the rules on setting the remuneration of judges must be justified by an objective of general interest, such as the elimination of an excessive public deficit. In principle, they should not be aimed specifically at judges.
Link to the judgment: https://aeur.eu/f/fmz (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)