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 62018TN0646

    Case T-646/18: Action brought on 26 October 2018 — Bonnafous v Commission

    IO C 25, 21.1.2019, p. 42–43 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    26/10/2018
    Date lodged:
    26/10/2018
    Author:
    Cúirt Ghinearálta
    Form:
    Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
    Authentic language:
    Fraincis
    Type of procedure:
    Caingean le haghaidh neamhniú

    21.1.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 25/42

    Action brought on 26 October 2018 — Bonnafous v Commission

    (Case T-646/18)

    (2019/C 25/55)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: Laurence Bonnafous (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Blot and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    declare that the present action is admissible and well founded;

    consequently,

    —

    annul the contested decision;

    —

    order the defendant to pay all of the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of her action seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 9 October 2018 rejecting the confirmatory application for access to a document (the 2018 Audit Service Report on HR Management in the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, registered under internal registration number ARES(2018)361356 and dated 21 January 2018), the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging infringement of Regulation No 1049/2001, of Article 15(3) TFEU and of Article 42 of the Charter, on the ground that the Commission failed to fulfil its obligations resulting from the public’s right of access to the documents of the institutions and the duty of transparency.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 296 TFEU and of Article 41 of the Charter, that is, the duty to state reasons, in that the analysis set out in the contested decision relies on general statements and abstract reasoning.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality, on the ground that the Commission refused to grant access to the requested document by wrongly invoking a general presumption of non-disclosure.
    Top