Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 June 2015 —

McCullough v Cedefop

(Case T‑496/13)

‛Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents relating to the award of public contracts and the conclusion of the ensuing contracts — Request seeking the production of documents in the context of criminal proceedings — Refusal of access — Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual — Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process’

1. Actions for annulment — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — Claim seeking that directions be issued to an institution — Inadmissibility — No infringement of the right to effective judicial protection (Arts 6(1), third para., TEU and 19(1) TEU; Arts 263, fourth para., TFEU, 264 TFEU, 267 TFEU and 277 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Arts 47 and 52(7)) (see paras 16, 18-22)

2. Actions for annulment — Judgment annulling a measure — Effects — Obligation to implement — Scope (Arts 263 TFEU, 265 TFEU and 266 TFEU) (see paras 23, 27)

3. Actions for annulment — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — No examination of legality of the criminal procedure before a Court of a Member State (Arts 256 and 263 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 48(2)) (see para. 26)

4. Privileges and immunities of the European Communities — Application for leave to serve a garnishee order on the European Union — Need for the Court’s authorisation — Application to permit third-party access to the premises and buildings concerned — Inadmissibility (Protocol on privileges and immunities of the European Communities, Art. 1) (see paras 31-33)

5. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Subject-matter — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Strict interpretation and adoption — Obligation to state reasons — Scope (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, fourth and eleventh recitals and Arts 1 and 4) (see paras 36-40, 82)

6. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of privacy and integrity of the individual — Scope — Obligation to assess in conformity with EU legislation on the protection of personal data — Provisions of Regulation No 45/2001 fully applicable to any application for access to documents containing personal information (European Parliament and Council Regulations No 45/2001, Art. 8, and No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1)(b)) (see paras 41-44)

7. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Refusal of access to a document on the ground that it does not exist or is not held by the institution concerned — Presumption of non-existence based on the statement to that effect by the institution concerned — Simple presumption rebuttable on the basis of relevant and consistent evidence (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Arts 2(3), and 4) (see paras 49, 50)

8. EU institutions — Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Regulation No 45/2001 — Concept of personal data — Minutes of a meeting containing the names of the participants — Included — Application for access to the minutes pursuant to Regulation No 1049/2001 — Obligation on the applicant to demonstrate the need to communicate the personal data in question (European Parliament and Council Regulations No 45/2001, Art. 5 and 8(a) and (b), and No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1)(b)) (see paras 66-68)

9. Judicial proceedings — Introduction of new pleas during the proceedings — Conditions — Plea based on matters revealed during the proceedings (Rules of Procedure of the General Court Art. 48(2)) (see para. 76)

10. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of privacy and integrity of the individual — Requirement that the institution should examine the documents specifically and individually — Obligation to state reasons — Scope — Possibility to base reasoning on general presumptions applying to certain categories of documents — Limits (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1)(b)) (see paras 83, 84, 86, 88, 90, 91)

11. EU institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Protection of the decision-making process — Protection of documents drawn up under a procedure already closed — Refusal to grant access — Obligation to state reasons — Scope (European Parliament and Council Regulation 1049/2001, Art. 4(3), second para.) (see paras 99-102, 107, 109, 111, 112)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Cedefop’s decision of 15 July 2013 refusing access to the minutes of its Governing Board, those of its Bureau and those of the ‘Knowledge Management System’ Steering Group for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2005; for an order that Cedefop supply the requested documents and a request to authorise, pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of the Council of 10 February 1975 establishing a European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (OJ 1975 L 39, p. 1), and to Article 1 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, the Greek national authorities to enter the premises and buildings of Cedefop, in accordance with the applicable Greek legislation, to investigate, search and confiscate in those premises and buildings, in order to obtain the requested documents and to investigate possible offences.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) of 15 July 2013 refusing access to the minutes of its Governing Board, of its Bureau and of the ‘Knowledge Management System’ Steering Group for the period 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2005 in so far as that decision refuses access to the minutes of the Governing Board and the Bureau, except as regards access to the surnames of the members of the Governing Board and the Bureau;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Cedefop to bear its own costs and to pay three quarters of the costs incurred by Mr Colin Boyd McCullough;