- 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-710/14: Action brought on 6 October 2014 — Herbert Smith Freehills v Council
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TN0710
62014TN0710
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
17.11.2014
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 409/63
(Case T-710/14)
2014/C 409/84
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Herbert Smith Freehills LLP (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Wytinck, lawyer)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul Decision 18/c/01/14 of the Council of the European Union of 23 July 2014; and
—order the Council to pay the costs of the applicant in the present proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
By its present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of the Council’s Decision 18/c/01/14 of 24 July 2014 whereby the Council refused the applicant’s confirmatory application for access under Regulation No 1049/2001 to certain documents related to the adoption of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging that the Council infringed Article 4(2), second indent, of Regulation No 1049/2001 in that i) not all documents identified by the Council fall within the scope of the exception relating to the protection of legal advice; and ii) there is an overriding public interest in the disclosure of the documents identified pursuant to the applicant’s access to documents request.
2.Second plea in law, alleging that the Council infringed Article 4(6) of Regulation No 1049/2001 in so far as it did not provide partial access to the documents requested.
3.Third plea in law, alleging that the Council committed a manifest error of assessment with regard to the scope of the applicant’s request for access to documents.
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).
OJ 2014 L 127, p. 1.