CELEX: 62019TN0537
Language: en
Date: 2019-07-30 00:00:00
Title: Case T-537/19: Action brought on 30 July 2019 — DK v GSA

30.9.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 328/65
            
         
      Action brought on 30 July 2019 — DK v GSA
      (Case T-537/19)
      (2019/C 328/73)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: DK (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European GNSS Agency
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the GSA decision of 20 May 2019 refusing full access to the document ‘summary of 26 June 2017 by Mr [X]’;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the GSA to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging an error of law in the application of Article 4(1)(a) of 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). In that regard, the applicant claims that the decision of the European GNSS Agency (GSA) of 20 May 2019 refusing it full access to the document ‘summary of 26 June 2017 by Mr [X]’ is illegal in that that refusal is based on the public security exception provided for in Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001, whereas the document in question:
                  
                              —
                           
                           
                              cannot be connected with issues of public security since it concerns a case connected with agency personnel and;
                           
                        
                              —
                           
                           
                              cannot be classified [RESTREINT/RESTRICTED EU].
                           
                        
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging an error of law in the application of Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation No 1049/2001. In that regard, the applicant submits that the contested decision is illegal in so far as the refusal is based on the exception in respect of protection of personal data of the natural persons named in the document, provided for in Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation No 1049/2001, since relying on that exception is, in the present case, unjustified and disproportionate.