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 62018CN0175

    Case C-175/18 P: Appeal brought on 6 March 2018 by PTC Therapeutics International Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 5 February 2018 in Case T-718/15: PTC Therapeutics International Ltd v European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    IO C 231, 2.7.2018, p. 8–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    201806150321954852018/C 231/091752018CJC23120180702EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL201803068921

    Case C-175/18 P: Appeal brought on 6 March 2018 by PTC Therapeutics International Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 5 February 2018 in Case T-718/15: PTC Therapeutics International Ltd v European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Top

    C2312018EN810120180306EN00098192

    Appeal brought on 6 March 2018 by PTC Therapeutics International Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 5 February 2018 in Case T-718/15: PTC Therapeutics International Ltd v European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    (Case C-175/18 P)

    2018/C 231/09Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Appellant: PTC Therapeutics International Ltd (represented by: G. Castle, Solicitor, B. Kelly, Solicitor, K. Ewert, Rechtsanwalt, M. Demetriou QC, C. Thomas, Barrister)

    Other parties to the proceedings: European Medicines Agency, European Confederation of Pharmaceutical Entrepreneurs (Eucope)

    Form of order sought

    The appellant claims that the Court should:

    —

    grant PTC’s appeal and set aside the judgment of the General Court;

    —

    annul the decision communicated by the EMA to PTC on 25 November 2015 to release certain information under the Transparency Regulation ( 1 );

    —

    remit the said decision back to the EMA for further consideration regarding redaction of confidential passages for consultation with PTC; and

    —

    order the EMA to pay PTC’s legal and other costs and expenses in relation to this matter.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    The judgment should be annulled for the following reasons:

    —

    the General Court failed to find that the documents in issue were protected by a general presumption of confidentiality;

    —

    the General Court failed to find that the documents in issue in their entirety constitute commercially confidential information that is protected by Article 4(2) of the Transparency Regulation;

    —

    the General Court failed to find that the documents in issue should be protected by Article 4(3) of the Transparency Regulation; and

    —

    the EMA failed to carry out a balancing exercise as required by law.

    ( 1 ) 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).

    Top