# C_2011179EN.01001801.xml

| 18.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/18

---

Action brought on 11 April 2011 — Timab Industries and CFPR v Commission

(Case T-211/11)

2011/C 179/31

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Timab Industries (Dinard, France) and Cie financière et de participations Roullier (CFPR) (Saint-Malo, France) (represented by: N. Lenoir, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs in their entirety. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs in their entirety.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants seek the annulment of the Commission’s decision of 1 February 2011 refusing access to certain Commission documents relating to a procedure pursuant to Article 101 TFEU and Article 13 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, concerning a cartel on the European market in animal feed phosphates (Case COMP/38866).

In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law:

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the second subparagraph of Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001, (1) in so far as the documents applied for are not opinions but decisions in respect of which it has not been established that disclosure might seriously undermine the decision-making process. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the second subparagraph of Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001, (1) in so far as the documents applied for are not opinions but decisions in respect of which it has not been established that disclosure might seriously undermine the decision-making process.

1

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the first indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in so far as the documents applied for do not contain any sensitive commercial information precluding, even partly, their disclosure. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the first indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in so far as the documents applied for do not contain any sensitive commercial information precluding, even partly, their disclosure.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in so far as the Commission contended that the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits would be undermined. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging error of law and a manifest error of assessment in relation to the third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in so far as the Commission contended that the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits would be undermined.

---

(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

---