Case T‑669/11

Darius Nicolai Spirlea

and

Mihaela Spirlea

v

European Commission

(Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Document originating from Germany in the context of an EU Pilot procedure — Article 4, paragraphs 4 and 5 — Article 4, paragraph 2, third indent — Refusal of access — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Obligation to carry out a specific, individual examination — Partial access — Overriding public interest)

Summary — Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber), 25 September 2014

1.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Documents originating from a Member State — Power of the Member State to request the institution not to disclose documents — Obligation on the institution not to disclose them without prior agreement

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(5))

2.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Documents originating from a Member State — Power of the Member State to request the institution not to disclose documents — Scope

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1) to (3) and (5))

3.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Documents originating from a Member State — Power of the Member State to request the institution not to disclose documents — Procedural implications — Obligation on the Member State and the EU institution to give reasons for a decision refusing access — Scope

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1) to (3))

4.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Documents originating from a Member State — Concept

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(5))

5.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Documents originating from a Member State — No obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1) to (3) and (5))

6.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of the objectives of inspection, investigation and audit activities — Overriding public interest justifying the disclosure of documents — Concept — Burden of proof

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2))

7.      Institutions of the European Union — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Overriding public interest justifying the disclosure of documents — Concept — Pursuit of a non-contractual action — Not included — Private nature of such an interest

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2))

8.      Actions for annulment — Review of legality — Criteria — Account taken only of the factual and legal elements existing at the date on which the contested measure was adopted

(Art. 263 TFEU)

9.      Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Abstract statement — Inadmissibility

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21 and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)(c))

10.    Judicial proceedings — Introduction of new pleas during the proceedings — Plea raised for the first time at the reply stage — Inadmissibility

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 44(1)(c) and 48(2))

1.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 46, 47)

2.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 49-51, 60, 61)

3.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 52-55, 83)

4.      Article 4(5) of Regulation No 1049/2001, regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents concerns all documents originating from the Member States and sent by them to an institution, irrespective of who, in accordance with the national division of competences, is the author of the document within the Member State concerned.

(see para. 67)

5.      The obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination which stems from the principle of transparency does not apply where the request for access concerns a document originating from a Member State, as referred to in Article 4(5) of Regulation No 1049/2001.

In the procedure leading to the adoption of a decision to refuse access, the institution to which the request has been made must simply ensure, first, that the Member State in question has based its objection on the substantive exceptions listed in Article 4(1) to (3) of Regulation No 1049/2001 and, secondly, that it has given proper reasons for its position.

(see paras 81, 82)

6.      Concerning the exception to the public right of access to documents based on the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits under the third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, whilst, when applying that exception, the burden of proof lies with the institution relying upon it, as regards the last clause of Article 4(2) of the regulation, it is, by contrast, for the party alleging an overriding public interest, within the meaning of that clause, to prove that interest.

Moreover, it is for the person alleging the existence of an overriding public interest to state the specific circumstances which justify the disclosure of the documents concerned. In that regard, a statement of purely general considerations is not sufficient to establish that, pursuant to the last clause of Article 4(2), an overriding public interest outweighs the reasons justifying a refusal to disclose the documents in question. Similarly, the overriding public interest capable of justifying the disclosure of a document need not necessarily be distinct from the principles which underlie Regulation No 1049/2001.

(see paras 91-93, 97)

7.      The interest in the possibility of obtaining documents as evidence in support of a non-contractual action before a national court cannot be regarded as constituting an ‘overriding public interest’ for the purposes of the last clause of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, but must be regarded as a private interest.

(see para. 99)

8.      See the text of the decision.

(see para. 102)

9.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 109, 110)

10.    See the text of the decision.

(see para. 112)