CELEX: 62017TN0152
Language: en
Date: 2017-03-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-152/17: Action brought on 6 March 2017 — Sumner v Commission

8.5.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 144/53
            
         Action brought on 6 March 2017 — Sumner v Commission
   (Case T-152/17)
   (2017/C 144/72)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Loreto Sumner (Leixlip, Ireland) (represented by: J. MacGuill, Solicitor)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the refusal of 10 January 2017 by the Secretary-General on behalf of the Commission, notified on 17 January 2017, to grant the applicant access to any submissions filed by any of the parties in ongoing infringement proceedings regarding an alleged violation by Ireland of the Working Time Directive.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging failure to conduct a concrete assessment of the request of access to documents under Regulation 1049/2001.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging an unlawful reliance on a general presumption, in breach of the principles identified in the case-law cited.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Third plea in law, alleging failure to process a specific and effective examination of the risk for each document concerned, in breach of the case-law cited.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Fourth plea in law alleging failure to proceed to a specific and effective examination of potential partial access, in breach of the case-law cited.
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Fifth plea in law alleging a manifest error of assessment regarding the existence of an overriding public interest, in breach of the principles in the case-law cited.