Order — ECLI:EU:C:2011:263
Date: 2011-04-14
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Provisions governing the Institutions;Access to documents
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - inadmissible

Appeal brought on 23 December 2010 by Dieter C. Umbach against the judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 21 October 2010 in Case T-474/08 Dieter C. Umbach v European Commission (Case C-609/10 P) Language of the case: German Parties Appellant: Dieter C. Umbach (represented by: M. Stephani, lawyer) Other party to the proceedings: European Commission Form of order sought Annulment of point 1 of the operative part of the judgment of the Court of 21 October 2010 in Case T-474/08 Umbach v European Commission. Annulment of the European Commission's decision of 2 September 2008, reference: SG.E.3/MV/psi D(2008) 6991. Order that the European Commission pay the costs of the case at first instance and on appeal. Pleas in law and main arguments By his appeal, Mr Umbach appeals the decision of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 October 2010 in Case T-474/08 and seeks the setting aside of that judgment, by which he was refused full access to documents connected with a TACIS contract which concern him. The appellant is of the opinion that on the basis of obligations under primary law, in particular Article 41(2)(b) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, direct access to documents which affect him must be permitted, in particular where a claim for payment is brought against him by the European Commission before a Member State court and he requires access to documents of the European Commission for the purposes of defending those proceedings. The European Commission on the other hand contends that only Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is applicable and that it is thereby entitled to grant only limited access or to refuse such access. With regard to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, the appellant claims that, to the extent that that regulation is applicable, the European Commission's discretion concerning his fundamental rights is limited, leading to the same result under secondary law as is reached under the primary provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights referred to. ____________