Action brought on 18 June 2021 — ClientEarth v Commission

(Case T-359/21)

(2021/C 338/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ClientEarth AISBL (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: F. Logue, Solicitor, and J. Kenny, Barrister at Law)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the defendant’s implied decision of 9 April 2021 refusing to grant access to the requested documents and information, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1) and Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, (2) related to, firstly, the active substances mancozeb and cypermethrin and, secondly, to voting positions of Member States in the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed in relation to the defendant’s Implementing Regulations (EU) No 2019/2094, (3) (EC) No 2020/2087, (4) (EU) No 2019/1589 (5) and (EU) No 2018/1262, (6) and

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to state reasons in breach of Article 8(1) of the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, Article 41(2), third indent, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and Article 296(2) TFEU.

(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).

(2) Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ 2006 L 264, p. 13).

(3) Commission implementing Regulation (EU) No 2019/2094 of 29 November 2019 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances benfluralin, dimoxystrobin, fluazinam, flutolanil, mancozeb, mecoprop-P, mepiquat, metiram, oxamyl and pyraclostrobin (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2019 L 317, p. 102-104).

(4) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2020/2087 of 14 December 2020 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance mancozeb, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2020 L 423, p. 50-52).

(5) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2019/1589 of 26 September 2019 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances amidosulfuron, beta-cyfluthrin, bifenox, chlorotoluron, clofentezine, clomazone, cypermethrin, daminozide, deltamethrin, dicamba, difenoconazole, diflubenzuron, diflufenican, fenoxaprop-P, fenpropidin, fludioxonil, flufenacet, fosthiazate, indoxacarb, lenacil, MCPA, MCPB, nicosulfuron, picloram, prosulfocarb, pyriproxyfen, thiophanate-methyl, triflusulfuron and tritosulfuron (Text with EEA relevance.)(OJ 2019 L 248, p. 24-27).

(6) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1262 of 20 September 2018 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances 1-methylcyclopropene, beta-cyfluthrin, chlorothalonil, chlorotoluron, clomazone, cypermethrin, daminozide, deltamethrin, dimethenamid-p, diuron, fludioxonil, flufenacet, flurtamone, fosthiazate, indoxacarb, MCPA, MCPB, prosulfocarb, thiophanate-methyl and tribenuron (Text with EEA relevance.) (OJ 2018 L 238, p. 62-64).