# C_2014380EN.01002301.xml

| 27.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 380/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 380/23

---

Action brought on 12 September 2014 — Jurašinović v Council

(Case T-658/14)

2014/C 380/30

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ivan Jurašinović (Angers, France) (represented by: O. Pfligersdorffer, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 8 July 2014 insofar as it limited the applicant’s access to the documents referred to in Annex 3 to that decision by invoking the protection of international relations and the protection of court proceedings and by redacting the requested documents on that ground; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 8 July 2014 insofar as it limited the applicant’s access to the documents referred to in Annex 3 to that decision by invoking the protection of international relations and the protection of court proceedings and by redacting the requested documents on that ground;

| — | order the Council to pay the applicant EUR 5  000 exclusive of tax, that is to say EUR 6  000 in total including all taxes, to cover procedural costs, with interest at the European Central Bank rate as at the date of registration of the application; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the applicant EUR 5  000 exclusive of tax, that is to say EUR 6  000 in total including all taxes, to cover procedural costs, with interest at the European Central Bank rate as at the date of registration of the application;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of court proceedings laid down in the second indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 (1), in so far as the Court had already held, in Jurašinović v Council (T-63/10, EU:T:2012:516) — in implementation of which the contested decision was adopted — that although that exception was applicable, it could not operate in the present case. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of court proceedings laid down in the second indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 (1), in so far as the Court had already held, in Jurašinović v Council (T-63/10, EU:T:2012:516) — in implementation of which the contested decision was adopted — that although that exception was applicable, it could not operate in the present case.

1

Jurašinović

Council

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of the public interest as regards international relations laid down in the third indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in that the measure or the documents at issue concerned information issued by the European Union and not from the United Nations system, with the result that the flow of information from that organisation would not be affected. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of the public interest as regards international relations laid down in the third indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in that the measure or the documents at issue concerned information issued by the European Union and not from the United Nations system, with the result that the flow of information from that organisation would not be affected.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the overriding public interest, which allows, under Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, derogation from the protection of court proceedings and legal advice, in that, first, the proceedings to which the documents relate are now definitively completed and, secondly, the Republic of Croatia is now a Member State of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the overriding public interest, which allows, under Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, derogation from the protection of court proceedings and legal advice, in that, first, the proceedings to which the documents relate are now definitively completed and, secondly, the Republic of Croatia is now a Member State of the European Union.

---

(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).

1

---