Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2016:486
Date: 2016-09-15
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Provisions governing the Institutions;Access to documents
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: United Kingdom

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 September 2016 — Philip Morris v Commission (Case T‑800/14) Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents drawn up in the context of preparatory works leading to the adoption of the directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products — Refusal to grant access — Exception relating to the protection of legal advice — Exception relating to protection of the decision-making process — Rights of the defence — Overriding public interest 1. Actions for annulment — Grounds — Lack of or inadequate statement of reasons — Separate ground from the one concerning substantive legality (Arts 263 TFEU and 296 TFEU) (see para. 27) 2. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Obligation to state reasons — Scope (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4) (see paras 28-30) 3. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Strict interpretation and application — Obligation to make a specific and individual examination for documents covered by an exception — Scope (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, first, second and fourth recitals and Arts 1 and 4) (see paras 50-54) 4. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Duty to balance relevant interests — Scope concerning documents underlying the legislative process (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, second and sixth recitals and Art. 4) (see paras 55, 56) 5. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of legal advice — Obligation on the institution to examine the nature of the measure as legal advice and the actual possibility of the protection of legal advice being undermined, and to verify the absence of a higher public interest justifying disclosure — Disclosure of legal opinions concerning legislative processes — Obligation on the institution to state in detail its reasons for any decision refusing access (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2), second indent) (see paras 58-62) 6. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of legal advice — Scope — Refusal to disclose an opinion of the legal service of an institution concerning a legislative measure forming the subject-matter of actions before national and EU courts — Lawfulness (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2), second indent) (see paras 65, 66, 68, 70) 7. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of legal advice — Overriding public interest justifying the disclosure of documents — Invocation of the principle of transparency — Need to put forward particular considerations in relation to the case (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2), second indent) (see para. 73) Re: APPLICATION based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision Ares(2014) 3388066 of 29 September 2014, in so far as it refuses to grant the applicant full access to the requested documents, with the exception of the redacted personal data contained therein. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Philip Morris Ltd to pay the costs.