74In the third place, the Court finds that the administration has a broad discretion in the reform of the AVPS (see, to that effect, judgment of 13 March 2013, Inglewood and Others v Parliament, T‑229/11 and T‑276/11, EU:T:2013:127, paragraph 71). In an area where the administration has such discretion, a mere practice, however common it may be, does not equate to precise, unconditional and consistent information which could actually give rise to a legitimate expectation (see, to that effect and by analogy, judgment of 2 December 2020, Thunus and Others v EIB, T‑247/19, not published, EU:T:2020:577, paragraph 70 and the case-law cited). Consequently, the fact that, until the 2023 decision, amendments to the AVPS made by the Parliament had systematically affected only those beneficiaries of that scheme who were not yet in receipt of their additional pension cannot give rise to a legitimate expectation that future reforms of the scheme could likewise concern only those persons.