This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013CA0612
Case C-612/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — ClientEarth v European Commission (Appeal — Access to documents of the institutions of the European Union — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Third indent of Article 4(2) — Environmental information — Aarhus Convention — Article 4(1) and (4) — Exception to right of access — Protection of the purpose of investigations — Studies carried out by an undertaking, at the request of the European Commission, concerning the transposition of directives on the environment — Partial refusal of access)
Case C-612/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — ClientEarth v European Commission (Appeal — Access to documents of the institutions of the European Union — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Third indent of Article 4(2) — Environmental information — Aarhus Convention — Article 4(1) and (4) — Exception to right of access — Protection of the purpose of investigations — Studies carried out by an undertaking, at the request of the European Commission, concerning the transposition of directives on the environment — Partial refusal of access)
Case C-612/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — ClientEarth v European Commission (Appeal — Access to documents of the institutions of the European Union — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Third indent of Article 4(2) — Environmental information — Aarhus Convention — Article 4(1) and (4) — Exception to right of access — Protection of the purpose of investigations — Studies carried out by an undertaking, at the request of the European Commission, concerning the transposition of directives on the environment — Partial refusal of access)
OJ C 311, 21.9.2015, p. 4–4
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
21.9.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 311/4 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — ClientEarth v European Commission
(Case C-612/13 P) (1)
((Appeal - Access to documents of the institutions of the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Third indent of Article 4(2) - Environmental information - Aarhus Convention - Article 4(1) and (4) - Exception to right of access - Protection of the purpose of investigations - Studies carried out by an undertaking, at the request of the European Commission, concerning the transposition of directives on the environment - Partial refusal of access))
(2015/C 311/04)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: ClientEarth (represented by: P. Kirch, lawyer)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Pignataro-Nolin, P. Costa de Oliveira and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by J. Rodrigues and L. Visaggio, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by M. Moore, M. Simm and A. Jensen, acting as Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1) |
Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in ClientEarth v Commission (T-111/11, EU:T:2013:482) in so far as the General Court of the European Union thereby accepted that the European Commission could, by its decision of 30 May 2011, refuse to ClientEarth, on the basis of a general presumption, full access to those of the studies relating to the compatibility of the legislation of various Member States with European Union environmental law which, on the date when that decision was adopted, had not led the European Commission to send a letter of formal notice to the Member State concerned, under the first paragraph of Article 258 TFEU, and had not therefore been placed in a file pertaining to the pre-litigation stage of infringement proceedings; |
|
2) |
Dismisses the appeal for the remainder; |
|
3) |
Annuls the decision of the Commission of 30 May 2011 in so far as the European Commission thereby refused to give to ClientEarth full access to the studies referred to in point 1 of the operative part of this judgment; |
|
4) |
Orders ClientEarth and the European Commission to bear their own costs relating to the appeal and to the procedure at first instance; |
|
5) |
Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs relating to the appeal. |