- 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 C-135/22 P: Appeal brought on 25 February 2022 by Patrick Breyer against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 15 December 2021 in Case T-158/19, Breyer v European Research Executive Agency
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0135
62022CN0135
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 171/20
—
(Case C-135/22 P)
(2022/C 171/26)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Appellant: Patrick Breyer (represented by: J. Breyer, Rechtsanwalt)
Other party to the proceedings: European Research Executive Agency
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
1.set aside the judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 in Case T-158/19, Breyer v REA, and annul the decision of the European Research Executive Agency (REA) of 17 January 2019 (ARES [2019] 266593) in its entirety; and
2.order the respondent to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Grounds of appeal and main arguments
In summary, the appellant claims, on the basis of Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, to have a right to full access to documents concerning the implementation of the Horizon 2020 research project ‘iBorderCtrl: Intelligent Portable Border Control System’. The public interest in disclosure with regard to the publicly funded development of AI systems which are intended to be used by authorities responsible for border control as polygraphs or to assess a risk posed by persons seeking to enter the country, outweighs private commercial interests.
Due to the ethical, social and human rights implications of the high-risk technology in question, the public interest in access to information arises already at the beginning of the research phase and cannot legitimately be deferred to the phase after completion of the research project.
The system for the dissemination of results provided for in Regulation No 1290/2013 and the grant agreement is not capable of satisfying academic interest, media interest and the interest of the public in general in the project.
—
(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).
—
(2) Regulation (EU) No 1290/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 laying down the rules for participation and dissemination in ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020)’ and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1906/2006 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 81).
—