13.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/37

(Case T-675/22)

(2023/C 94/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: James T. Flynn (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Dornan, Barrister-at-Law, and K. Winters, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—issue an order granting annulment of the decision of the European Central Bank dated 1st September 2022 (hereafter the ‘Contested Decision’) refusing full disclosure of the correspondences and exchange of documents between the European Central Bank and the Central Bank of Ireland in respect of Decision 2013/211/EU of the European Central Bank (1) as requested by the applicant;

—issue an order providing for the payment of the applicant’s legal costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging that the Contested Decision is in breach of Article 4(1)(a), fourth indent, of Decision 2004/258/EC of the European Central Bank (2). The respondent erred in refusing the applicant access to the information requested on the ground that disclosure of the documents, in whole or in part, would undermine the public interest in protecting the integrity of euro banknotes.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the Contested Decision is in breach of Article 4(l)(c) of Decision 2004/258. The respondent erred in refusing the applicant access to the documents requested, in whole or in part, on the ground that the exchange of views between the ECB and National Central Banks is confidential information protected by Community law.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the Contested Decision is in breach of Article 4 of Decision 2004/258/EC. The respondent erred in finding no overriding public interest in disclosure, where the applicant has sought the documents in aid of judicial proceedings, and where refusal to disclose prevents or impedes the exercise of the right to information under Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. (3)

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Contested Decision fails to provide adequate reasons for the refusal of access to the documents requested.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Contested Decision is in breach of the right to good administration, and the right to an effective remedy, under Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union respectively.

(1) Decision 2013/211/EU of the European Central Bank of 19 April 2013 on the denominations, specifications, reproduction, exchange and withdrawal of euro banknotes (recast) (ECB/2013/10) (OJ 2013 L 118, p. 37).

(2) Decision 2004/258/EC of the European Central Bank of 4 March 2004 on public access to European Central Bank documents (ECB/2004/3) (OJ 2004 L 80, p. 42).

(3) Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p. 1).