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 62018TN0202

    Case T-202/18: Action brought on 23 March 2018 — Bruel v Commission

    OJ C 166, 14.5.2018, p. 45–46 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    14.5.2018   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 166/45

    Action brought on 23 March 2018 — Bruel v Commission

    (Case T-202/18)

    (2018/C 166/57)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: Damien Bruel (Paris, France) (represented by: H. Hansen, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    declare the present application admissible and well founded;

    and consequently:

    —

    annul the decision of 18 January 2018 entitled ‘Decision of the Secretary General pursuant to Article 4 of the rules implementing Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001’ on the ground of infringement of Articles 4, 6 and 9 of that regulation, and infringement of Article 47 of the Charter, of Article 6 the European Convention on Human Rights, of the general principle of equality of arms, and of the duty to state reasons;

    in any event:

    —

    order the defendant to pay all the costs;

    —

    reserve to the applicant all other rights, entitlements, pleas and actions.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of his application, the applicant puts forward four pleas in law:

    1.

    A first plea, alleging that Articles 4 and 9 of 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) have been infringed.

    2.

    A second plea, alleging that Article 6 of Regulation No 1049/2001 has been infringed.

    3.

    A third plea, alleging that the general principle of equality of arms, Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights have been infringed.

    4.

    A fourth plea, alleging that Article 4(6) of Regulation No 1049/2001, the principle of proportionality and the duty to state reasons have been infringed.
    Top