EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-546/24: Action brought on 20 October 2024 – Reclaim and Martínez González v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0546

62024TN0546

October 20, 2024
With Google you find a lot.
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

EN

C series

C/2025/86

(Case T-546/24)

(C/2025/86)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Reclaim ASBL (Etterbeek, Belgium), Esther Martínez González (Laeken, Belgium) (represented by: C. Zatschler, Senior Counsel)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

annul the implied decision of the European Commission of 20 August 2024, by which the Commission, pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, (1) is deemed to have rejected the applicants’ request for access to the documents related to the exchanges held between Hungary and the European Commission, as well as preparatory documents, meeting agendas and lines to take as regards Hungary’s compliance with the Horizontal Enabling Condition no 3 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council; (2)

order the Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the applicants.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law.

The Commission failed to reply within the applicable deadline to the applicant’s confirmatory application for access to documents, giving rise to a deemed refusal pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001. Such a deemed refusal of access entails, by definition, an absolute lack of reasoning, and therefore does not satisfy the duty to state reasons which Article 296 TFEU imposes on EU institutions.

(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) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (OJ 2021 L 231, p. 159).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/86/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia