|
14.4.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 109/24 |
Action brought on 9 February 2012 — ClientEarth v Council
(Case T-62/12)
2012/C 109/51
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: O. Brouwer and P. van den Berg, lawyers)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the decision of the defendant refusing (full) access to document 6865/09, containing a legal opinion of the defendant’s legal service concerning the legality of draft amendments to a European Commission proposal for the recast of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1), pursuant to the said regulation; and |
|
— |
Order the defendant to pay the costs of the procedure. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.
|
1. |
First plea in law, alleging violation of Article 4(2) second indent of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, as the defendant did not show how disclosure of the document in question would undermine the protection of legal advice. |
|
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging violation of Article 4(3) first sub-paragraph of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, as the defendant did not show how disclosure of the document in question would seriously undermine the Council’s decision-making process. |
|
3. |
Third plea in law, alleging violation of both Article 4(2) second indent and 4(3) first sub-paragraph of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, as the defendant failed to take account of the overriding public interest in disclosure of the document in question. |
|
4. |
Fourth plea in law, alleging violation of Article 4(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and the principle of proportionality, as the Council did not properly consider whether fuller access to the document in question could have been provided. |
(1) 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 (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43)