3.8.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 254/17 |
Action brought on 8 May 2015 — Gameart v Commission
(Case T-264/15)
(2015/C 254/21)
Language of the case: Polish
Parties
Applicant: Gameart sp. z o.o. (Bielsko-Biała, Poland) (represented by: P. Hoffman, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
annul the European Commission decision of 18 February 2015 in so far as it confirms the refusal to consider the request sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland for access to copies, held by that Ministry, of letters from the Republic of Poland to the Commission concerning the procedure conducted by the Commission in respect of a breach by the Republic of Poland of EU law in connection with the Law of 19 November 2009 on games of chance; |
— |
rule — in the event that it does not share the view, taken by the applicant, that the second paragraph of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents cannot be construed as authorising the European Commission to adopt a binding decision on a request for access to documents, submitted by a natural or legal person to an authority of a Member State, which has been forwarded by that State to the Commission — that, by virtue of Article 277 TFEU, the second paragraph of Article 5 of that regulation cannot be applied in the present case on the ground that it is invalid; |
— |
rule that the European Commission is to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the applicant. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of its action, the applicant puts forward four pleas in law.
1. |
The first plea in law, concerning the lack of competence of the Commission in the light of the second paragraph of Article 5 of Regulation No 1049/2001
|
2. |
The second plea in law, concerning a breach of Article 4(4) and 4(5) of Regulation No 1049/2001
|
3. |
The third plea in law, concerning a breach of Article 296 TFEU
|
4. |
The fourth plea in law, concerning a claim of invalidity pursuant to Article 277 TFEU
|