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
—
(Case C-399/13 P)
2013/C 274/21
Language of the case: English
Appellant: Stichting Corporate Europe Observatory (represented by: S. Crosby, Solicitor)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany
The Appellant claims that the Court should:
—uphold the appeal, set aside the judgment of 7 June 2013 of the General Court, and annul the Commission’s decision of 6 December 2010;
—order the Commission to pay the Appellant’s costs for this appeal and for the action in annulment before the General Court.
The Appellant submits that the General Court made three errors in law.
1.An error in law in holding the DG Trade Vademecum on Access to Documents (the Vademecum) was not intended to produce external effects;
2.An error in law by disregarding the presumption that the documents were intended to be seen by a large number of people;
3.An error in law in holding in the circumstances that there was no implicit waiver of confidentiality.
—