EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016TA0653
Case T-653/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Malta v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the Commission — Documents originating from a Member State — Documents exchanged pursuant to the control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy — Article 113 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Public access following a request made by a non-governmental organisation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation — Choice of legal basis)
Case T-653/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Malta v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the Commission — Documents originating from a Member State — Documents exchanged pursuant to the control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy — Article 113 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Public access following a request made by a non-governmental organisation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation — Choice of legal basis)
Case T-653/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Malta v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the Commission — Documents originating from a Member State — Documents exchanged pursuant to the control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy — Article 113 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Public access following a request made by a non-governmental organisation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation — Choice of legal basis)
OJ C 221, 25.6.2018, p. 17–18
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
Case T-653/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Malta v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the Commission — Documents originating from a Member State — Documents exchanged pursuant to the control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy — Article 113 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Public access following a request made by a non-governmental organisation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation — Choice of legal basis)
Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Malta v Commission
(Case T-653/16) ( 1 )
‛(Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the Commission — Documents originating from a Member State — Documents exchanged pursuant to the control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy — Article 113 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Public access following a request made by a non-governmental organisation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation — Choice of legal basis)’
2018/C 221/19Language of the case: EnglishParties
Applicant: Republic of Malta (represented by: A. Buhagiar, acting as Agent)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, acting as Agents)
Re:
Action under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Commission of 13 July 2016 on a confirmatory application by Greenpeace for access to documents relating to an allegedly irregular shipment of live bluefin tuna from Tunisia to a fish farm located in Malta, in so far as it grants Greenpeace access to documents originating from the Maltese authorities.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls Decision of the Secretary-General of the European Commission of 13 July 2016 on a confirmatory application by Greenpeace for access to documents relating to an allegedly irregular shipment of live bluefin tuna from Tunisia to Malta in so far as it grants Greenpeace access to the documents listed in Annex B to that decision under Nos 112 to 230; |
|
2. |
Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
|
3. |
Orders each party to bear its own costs, including those relating to the interim measures. |
( 1 ) OJ C 428, 21.11.2016.