- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-166/19: Action brought on 14 March 2019 — Bronckers v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0166
62019TN0166
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
13.5.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 164/58
(Case T-166/19)
(2019/C 164/61)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Marco Bronckers (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Kreijger, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the decision of the Commission of 10 January 2019 under Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 (1) rejecting the applicant’s confirmatory application for access to documents mentioned in the minutes of the Joint Committee on Spirit Drinks established under the Agreement between the European Community and the United Mexican States on the mutual recognition and protection of designations for spirit drinks; (2)
—order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred by the applicant.
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 that the Commission’s rejection of the access request misapplies Article 4(1)(a), third indent, of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001, and/or infringes Article 296 TFEU.
2.Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s rejection of the access request misapplies Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 and/or infringes Article 296 TFEU, as the Commission has not shown that access to all of the requested documents undermines commercial interests of the Consejo Regulador del Tequila (CRT) or its members.
3.Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission wrongly found that the applicant failed to show an overriding public interest in disclosure.
4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s rejection of partial access misapplies Article 4(6) and/or Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001, and/or infringes Art. 296 TFEU.
(1) Regulation (EC) 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).
(2) See Council Decision of 27 May 1997 concerning the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Community and the United Mexican States on the mutual recognition and protection of designations for spirit drinks (OJ 1997 L 152, p. 15).