Language of document :

Action brought on 22 October 2010 - Evropaïki Dynamiki/Commission

(Case T-511/10)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki - Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athènes, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and M. Dermitzakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Annul the decision of 12 August 2010 of the Secretariat General of the European Commission (Ref. SG.E.3/FM/MIP/mbp/psi - Ares(2010) 508190 - 12/08/2010) rejecting the request for a review submitted by the applicant through its letter dated 31 December 2009, registered on 5 January 2010 (Ref. GESTDEM 2009/4890); and

Order the defendant to pay the applicant's legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case the applicant seeks the annulment of the defendant's decision of 12 August 2010 (Ref. SG.E.3/FM/MIP/mbp/psi - Ares(2010) 508190 - 12/08/2010) rejecting the request for a review submitted by the applicant by its letter dated 31 December 2009, registered on 5 January 2010 (Ref. GESTDEM 2009/4890), in which the applicant, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/20011, requested the review of the positions taken by the Publications Office of the European Union in its respective letter of 11 December 2009, following the applicant's initial request dated 9 October 2009, concerning access to all requests for quotation pertaining to all lots of the Publications Office's framework contracts No 6011, 6102, 6103, 6020, 6121, 6031 (apart from lot 4) and 10030.

In support of its claim the applicant argues that the defendant did not proceed to an individual assessment of the requested documents. Moreover, the applicant contends that the justification provided by the defendant with regard to the protection of the economic policy of the European Union, the protection of the commercial interests and the public security reasons should be rejected as wholly unfounded.

____________

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)