This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TJ0651
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 September 2022.
Hans-Wilhelm Saure v European Commission.
Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Commission correspondence concerning the quantity and delivery timings of BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines – Action for annulment – Express decisions adopted after implied refusal of access – No lis pendens on account of the inadmissibility of another action – Total and partial refusal of access – Exceptions relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual, the protection of legal advice, the protection of the decision-making process and the protection of the commercial interests of a third party.
Case T-651/21.
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 September 2022.
Hans-Wilhelm Saure v European Commission.
Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Commission correspondence concerning the quantity and delivery timings of BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines – Action for annulment – Express decisions adopted after implied refusal of access – No lis pendens on account of the inadmissibility of another action – Total and partial refusal of access – Exceptions relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual, the protection of legal advice, the protection of the decision-making process and the protection of the commercial interests of a third party.
Case T-651/21.
Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2022:526
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 September 2022 –
Saure v Commission
(Case T‑651/21) ( 1 )
(Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Commission correspondence concerning the quantity and delivery timings of BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines – Action for annulment – Express decisions adopted after implied refusal of access – No lis pendens on account of the inadmissibility of another action – Total and partial refusal of access – Exceptions relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual, the protection of legal advice, the protection of the decision-making process and the protection of the commercial interests of a third party)
1. |
Judicial proceedings – Admissibility of actions – Objection of lis pendens – Same parties, subject matter and submissions in two actions – Form of order sought identical to that of an action declared inadmissible – Cessation of lis alibi pendens – Admissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 86) (see paragraphs 20-23) |
2. |
EU institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of access to documents – Protection of privacy and integrity of the individual – Applicability of all of the provisions of Regulation 2018/1725 – Obligation on the applicant to demonstrate the need to communicate the personal data in question – Obligation on the institution to verify of its own motion whether the legitimate interests of the person concerned have been prejudiced (European Parliament and Council Regulations No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1)(b), and 2018/1725, Arts 3(1), 5 and 9(1)(a) and (b)) (see paragraphs 31-37) |
3. |
EU institutions – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Regulation 2018/1725 – Request for access to personal data – Obligation to establish the need to transfer those data – Scope – Public interest in disclosure of the data – Invocation of justifications related to the safeguarding of national security and public safety – Invocation of the principle of transparency – Need to put forward particular considerations in relation to the case (European Parliament and Council Regulations No 1049/2001, recital 2 and Art. 4(1)(b), and 2018/1725, recital 28 and Art. 9(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 41, 42, 45-51) |
4. |
EU institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of access to documents – Protection of legal advice – Scope – Refusal to disclose opinions of the Commission’s Legal Service containing draft contract terms relating to negotiations with producers of COVID-19 vaccines – Overriding public interest in disclosure – None (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, recitals 2 and 6 and Art. 4(2), second indent, and (7)) (see paragraphs 58-60, 62-69) |
5. |
EU institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of access to documents – Protection of the decision-making process – Scope – Documents relating to ongoing negotiations for the conclusion of advance purchase agreements in respect of COVID-19 vaccines – Overriding public interest justifying the disclosure of documents – None – Time-limited application of the exception (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(3), first subpara., and (7)) (see paragraphs 76-77, 84-93) |
6. |
EU institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of access to documents – Protection of the commercial interests of a third party – Refusal to grant access – Obligation to state reasons – Scope – Possibility of relying on general presumptions applicable to certain categories of documents (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2), first indent) (see paragraphs 100-104, 107, 110-112) |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders Mr Hans-Wilhelm Saure to pay the costs. |
( 1 ) OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.