Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62025TN0489

Case T-489/25: Action brought on 6 January 2026 – Krüßmann v Court of Justice of the European Union

OJ C, C/2026/1347, 16.3.2026, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/1347/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/1347/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2026/1347

16.3.2026

Action brought on 6 January 2026 – Krüßmann v Court of Justice of the European Union

(Case T-489/25)

(C/2026/1347)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Jannis Krüßmann (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: N. Spörkel, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the decision of the Court of Justice of 24 June 2025, which refused the confirmatory application of the applicant (No 0004/2025C) concerning access to all handwritten notes, meeting minutes and presentations of all participants of the Superior Courts Network (SCN) of the ECHR on 6 and 7 June 2024 in relation to the theme of Session 1 ‘National Courts and the challenge of climate change litigation’;

—

annul the third indent of Article 3(1)(a) of the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 26 November 2019 concerning public access to documents held by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the exercise of its administrative functions (1);

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

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 infringement of the right of access to information of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 (2)

—

The defendant failed to have regard to the fact that information on strategic climate change litigation constitutes environmental information for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006;

—

Furthermore, the defendant failed to have regard to the fact that its participation in the SCN was not in its ‘judicial’ capacity.

—

In addition, the defendant incorrectly applied the exception for the protection of the public interest relating to international relations, in so far as it:

—

failed to seek the opinion of the affected third parties;

—

failed to provide reasons in support of its view that the public interest relating to international relations could be negatively affected by the disclosure of the information;

—

manifestly distorted the facts by ignoring that documents shared over the intranet are not confidential under the SCN Charter (3);

—

manifestly distorted the facts by failing to have regard to the fact that the other participants at the meeting of the SCN are themselves bound by requests for information made under international law in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Aarhus Convention.

—

The defendant failed to take into account the public interest in the dissemination of the requested information.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU

—

The defendant failed to provide sufficient reasons in the contested decision concerning the negative effect on the public interest relating to international relations.

3.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 3 of Regulation No 1367/2006 in conjunction with Article 4(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (4)

—

The defendant failed to consult ‘third parties’, from whom the requested documents originate, prior to the refusal of access.

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 2(1) of the CJEU access decision.

—

The defendant failed to have regard to the fact that it exercised administrative functions while participating in the SCN.

—

The exclusion for the protection of the public interest in the CJEU access decision is void, since it concerns a restriction of the right to access documents, which contrary to Article 15(3) TFEU was not decided in the ordinary legislative procedure – accordingly it cannot be relied on by the defendant as the basis of an argument.

—

International relations would not be negatively affected by the disclosure of the requested documents.

(1)   OJ 2020 C 45, p. 2 (‘CJEU access decision’).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ 2006 L 264, p. 13).

(3)  The Charter of the SCN is available at the following link: Cooperation charter of the Superior Courts Network.

(4)  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).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/1347/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Top