Access to information regarding total allowable catches (TACs) of EU fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic discussed and adopted on 17 and 18 December 2018, and exemptions from the landing obligation

La demande est partiellement réussie.

Dear DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries,

In accordance with Article 2 of Regulation 1049/2001 and Article 3 of Regulation 1367/2001, ClientEarth would like to have access to the following documents related to the total allowable catches (TACs) for fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic for 2019:

1. Any records, minutes or notes of meetings/discussions that took place between the Commission and the Member State representatives on the TACs for 2019, including any minutes or notes of Council working party/ministerial meetings taken by Commission staff, and any internal Commission briefings on the subject. We do not seek access to the Commission's legislative proposals for the 2018 TACs, unless such documents are annotated and/or contain negotiation directives. We also do not seek access to the documents that are publicly available in the Council’s document register, filed under interinstitutional code 2018/0380 (NLE) at the date of this request.
2. A full table of all proposed and agreed quota adjustments (such as those previously referred to as quota top-ups or any deductions) to account for a) catches that could be discarded before the introduction of the landing obligation, but now will have to be landed and b) exemptions from the landing obligation (in tonnes and %), and TACs before the adjustments (top-ups or deductions) were applied;
3. A detailed description of the methodology used to calculate quota adjustments (top-ups or deductions);
4. The calculations that the proposed and agreed quota adjustments (top-ups or deductions) were based on, ideally in Excel spreadsheet format.
5. We would also like to have access to any documents relating to exemptions from the landing obligation within the period commencing with the STECF’s Expert Working Group 18-06 of June 2018 and ending with the Commission’s adoption of the draft discard plans for 2019 in October 2018, including any correspondence between the Commission and the Member States and any records, minutes or notes of meetings/discussions that took place between the Commission and the Member States regarding this matter.

In the interests of good administration, ClientEarth requests that the response clearly identifies the documents in the Commission’s possession in relation to each of these categories and clearly indicates to which category the disclosed documents relate.

Yours faithfully,

Anne Friel

EC ARES NOREPLY,

[1]Ares(2019)785077 - RE: access to documents request - Access to
information regarding total allowable catches (TACs) of EU fish stocks in
the Northeast Atlantic discussed and adopted on 17 and 18 December 2018,
and exemptions from the landing obligation

Sent by ve_mare.acces.documents (MARE)
<[email address]>. All responses have to be sent to this
email address.
Envoyé par ve_mare.acces.documents (MARE)
<[email address]>. Toutes les réponses doivent être
effectuées à cette adresse électronique.

Dear Madam,

Thank you for your e-mail dated 08/02/2019. We hereby acknowledge receipt
of your application for access to documents, which was registered on
11/02/2019 under reference number GestDem 2019/768.

In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, your application
will be handled within 15 working days. The time limit will expire on
04/03/2019. In case this time limit needs to be extended, you will be
informed in due course.

You have lodged your application via the AsktheEU.org website. Please note
that this is a private third-party website which has no link with any
institution of the European Union. Therefore, the European Commission
cannot be held accountable for any technical issues or problems linked to
the use of this system.

Please note that the private third party running the AsktheEU.org website
is responsible and accountable for the processing of your personal data
via that website, and not the European Commission. For further information
on your rights, please refer to the third party's privacy policy.

We understand that the third party running that website usually publishes
the content of applicants' correspondence with the European Commission on
that website. This includes the personal data that you may have
communicated to the European Commission (e.g. your private postal
address).

Similarly, the third party publishes on that website any reply that the
Commission will send to the email address of the applicants generated by
the AsktheEU.org website.

If you do not wish your correspondence with the European Commission to be
published on the AsktheEU.org website, you can provide us with an
alternative, private e-mail address for further correspondence. In that
case, the European Commission will send all future electronic
correspondence addressed to you only to that private address.

Best regards,
Cécile DUCATEZ
MARE.E.4 – J-99 05/64 – Tél: 50288

Afficher les sections citées

ve_mare.acces.documents (MARE), Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]themeData
Link: [3]colorSchemeMapping

[4]Ares(2019)2078453 - Your request for access to documents - Gestdem No
2019/768

Sent by ve_mare.acces.documents (MARE)
<[email address]>. All responses have to be sent to this
email address.
Envoyé par ve_mare.acces.documents (MARE)
<[email address]>. Toutes les réponses doivent être
effectuées à cette adresse électronique.

Dear Ms. Friel,

 

We refer to your request for access to documents dated 08/02/2019,
registered under the above mentioned reference number.

 

Your application is currently being handled. However, your application
concerns other interested parties (Member States regional groups) which,
in accordance with Article 4(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding
public access to documents, must be consulted in order for the Commission
to assess whether an exception under the above-mentioned article is
applicable.

 

Therefore, we will be in a position to complete the handling of your
application only after the third parties have given their opinion on the
possible disclosure of the documents concerned. We will come back to you
later in the week accordingly.

 

We apologize for this delay and for any inconvenience this may cause.

 

Best regards,

 

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01D4E331.D08D70A0
2. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
3. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
4. https://webgate.ec.testa.eu/Ares/ext/doc...

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

34 Attachments

 
 
_____________________________________________
From: MARE ACCES DOCUMENTS
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 4:50 PM
To: '[email address]' <[email address]>
Cc: MARE ACCES DOCUMENTS <[DG MARE request email]>
Subject: Your request for access to documents - GESTDEM 2019/768 - EMAIL 4
 
 
Dear Ms. Friel,
 
Please find attached the 4th email with the documents requested.
Kind regards,
MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS
 
European Commission
DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Unit E.4 – Legal Affairs
 
 
 
 
 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

2 Attachments

 
 
_____________________________________________
From: MARE ACCES DOCUMENTS
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 4:53 PM
To: '[email address]' <[email address]>
Cc: MARE ACCES DOCUMENTS <[DG MARE request email]>
Subject: Your request for access to documents - GESTDEM 2019/768 - EMAIL 5
 
 
Dear Ms Friel,
 
This is the last email with last document requested.
 
Kind regards,
 
MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS
 
European Commission
DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Unit E.4 – Legal Affairs
 
 
 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

11 Attachments

Dear Ms Friel,

Please find enclosed the first part of the requested documents, together with an advance copy of the reply from DG MARE.


Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:

3458266_LO request ix.pdf.pdf
3458266_LO request vi.pdf.pdf
3458266_LO request vii.pdf.pdf
3458266_LO request viii.pdf.pdf
3458266_LO request x.pdf.pdf
[YES] FO 2019 TAC Proposal Worksheets November 2018 (002).pdf.pdf
3109482_email_Redacted.pdf.pdf
3109618_email_Redacted.pdf.pdf
3458266_email_Redacted.pdf.pdf
3458266_French fisheries description SWW.pdf

Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.

Best regards

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

5 Attachments

Here are the 2^nd part of the documents requested under category 5

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

15 Attachments

 

Here are the 3^rd  part of the documents requested under category 5

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

24 Attachments

 

 

Here are the 7^th (and last) part of the documents requested under
category 5

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

18 Attachments

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 1 DK study discard survival in Danish set net trials Redacted.pdf.pdf

    861K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 2 DK study on discard survival of plaice in Danish seinef.pdf.pdf

    704K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 3 UK health and vitality report Redacted.pdf.pdf

    1.5M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 5 UK survival report otter trawls Redacted.pdf.pdf

    2.1M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 6 NL study on survival of skates and rays 4.4.2018.pdf.pdf

    362K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 7 Kopie von STECF data for reference.pdf.pdf

    867K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 8a NL study Increasing dicards survival.pdf.pdf

    1.2M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 8b NL study Discards survival probabilities of flatfish and rays.pdf.pdf

    1.7M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 9 BE study on high survival.pdf.pdf

    1.5M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 10 DK study on discard survival of plaice in bottom otter trawl OTB 01.05.2018.pdf.pdf

    782K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 12 BE evaluation of large mesh extension.pdf.pdf

    2.1M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 13 FR Study S lectivit des chaluts de fond langoustiniers et d mersau.pdf

    242K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Appendix 14 FR Study Analyse de limpact conomique.pdf.pdf

    1.6M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Joint Recommendation for 2019 main text version 2018.05.29rein.pdf.pdf

    1.4M Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Kopie von Choke species analysis version 2018.04.30.pdf.pdf

    483K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Letter to DG Machado JR Landing Obligation Redacted.pdf.pdf

    238K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 Note on choke species plus individual tables final 25.05.2018.pdf.pdf

    729K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    3458869 NS choke mitigation tool final version 2018.04.30 Redacted.pdf.pdf

    901K Download View as HTML

 

Here are the first half of the 6^th part of the documents requested under
category 5

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

2 Attachments

 

 

Here is the second half of the 6^th part of the documents requested under
category 5

 

MARE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

Dear Sir/madam,

RE: Confirmatory application in relation to the Commission's decision not to disclose certain information on total allowable catches (TACs) of EU fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic discussed and adopted on 17 and 18 December 2018, and exemptions from the landing obligation

In accordance with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament Council and Commission documents, ClientEarth hereby submits a confirmatory application with regard to the Commission's initial reply to its request for documents with reference GestDem 2019/768 relating to the adoption of the fishing opportunities for the Northeast Atlantic for 2018 under Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1380/2013 and exemptions from the landing obligation.

On 8 Feburary 2019 ClientEarth requested "access to the following documents related to the total allowable catches (TACs) for fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic for 2019:

1. Any records, minutes or notes of meetings/discussions that took place between the Commission and the Member State representatives on the TACs for 2019, including any minutes or notes of Council working party/ministerial meetings taken by Commission staff, and any internal Commission briefings on the subject. We do not seek access to the Commission's legislative proposals for the 2018 TACs, unless such documents are annotated and/or contain negotiation directives. We also do not seek access to the documents that are publicly available in the Council’s document register, filed under interinstitutional code 2018/0380 (NLE) at the date of this request.
2. A full table of all proposed and agreed quota adjustments (such as those previously referred to as quota top-ups or any deductions) to account for a) catches that could be discarded before the introduction of the landing obligation, but now will have to be landed and b) exemptions from the landing obligation (in tonnes and %), and TACs before the adjustments (top-ups or deductions) were applied;
3. A detailed description of the methodology used to calculate quota adjustments (top-ups or deductions);
4. The calculations that the proposed and agreed quota adjustments (top-ups or deductions) were based on, ideally in Excel spreadsheet format.
5. We would also like to have access to any documents relating to exemptions from the landing obligation within the period commencing with the STECF’s Expert Working Group 18-06 of June 2018 and ending with the Commission’s adoption of the draft discard plans for 2019 in October 2018, including any correspondence between the Commission and the Member States and any records, minutes or notes of meetings/discussions that took place between the Commission and the Member States regarding this matter."

The Commission replied on 25 March 2019, stating that it would send its response once it had completed the necessary consultations with Member States regional groups. The Commission sent its response on 5 April 2019, disclosing a large number of documents relevant to the request, for which ClientEarth is grateful.

With this Confirmatory Application, ClientEarth would like to highlight certain documents that we have good reason to believe exist and are in the Commission's possession. We respectfully ask the Secretariat General to reconsider the Commission's response in relation to these documents.

FAILURE TO DISCLOSE COMMISSION RECORDS OF DISCUSSIONS AT COUNCIL WORKING PARTY MEETINGS AND THE AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES COUNCIL

In June 2017 and April 1018 ClientEarth made very similar requests for access to documents in respect of the TACs Regulation adopted for 2017 and 2018 respectively. On both occasions, we received the Commission's own records of the discussions which took place in the Council working parties leading up to the adoption of the TACs for 2017 and 2018 (in 2017, we received them in response to our initial request while in respect of 2018, we received them in response to our confirmatory application). However, such records have not been disclosed in respect of the TACs for 2019. This is particularly concerning since these documents are legislative documents for the purpose of Regulation 1049/2001 and contain "environmental information" within the meaning of Article 2(1)(d) of Regulation 1367/2006. Article 12(2) of Regulation 1049/2001 provides a clear definition of "legislative documents", that is "documents drawn up or received in the course of procedures for the adoption of acts which are legally binding in or for the Member States". The documents at issue in this request meet this definition because they are documents drawn up (or which should be drawn up) and received in the course of the procedure for the adoption of the TACs Regulation, which is legally binding in and for the Member States.

Furthermore, the Aarhus Regulation defines "environmental information" as, inter alia:
"any information in written, visual, aural, electronic or any other material form on:

(iii) measures (including administrative measures), such as policies, legislation, plans, programmes, environmental agreements, and activities affecting or likely to affect the elements and factors referred to in points (i) and (ii) as well as measures or activities designed to protect those elements".
The elements referred to in point (i) are:

"the state of the elements of the environment, such as air and atmosphere, water, soil, land, landscape and natural sites including wetlands, coastal and marine areas, biological diversity and its components, including genetically modified organisms, and the interaction among these elements."
The documents contain information about the TACs for 2019, which regulate the exploitation of stocks of fish and other marine species. Therefore, they have a direct impact on biological diversity in coastal and marine areas. As such, they contain "environmental information" within the meaning of the Aarhus Regulation.

We would like to understand if the Commission simply did not take any records of the working party discussions in respect of the TACs for 2019 or if it has failed to disclose them.

In the latter case, as confirmed by the CJEU (Case T-653/16 Malta v Commission, para. 63), it is well-established practice for the Secretary-General to verify as part of the assessment of a confirmatory application whether all documents falling under the scope of the request have been identified at the initial stage. This is especially the case where the applicant, as in this confirmatory application, contests that the initial list of documents was complete. Indeed, ClienEarth made a similar request in its confirmatory application relating to access to documents relevant to the TACs for 2018 which resulted in the Commission disclosing its records of Council working party meetings with its confirmatory decision. ClientEarth therefore requests the Secretary General to conduct such a verification of the scope of the initial request in relation to the TACs for 2019.

Should the Commission's minutes of working party meetings in fact exist, non-disclosure would constitute an implied refusal of access, for the purposes of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1049/2001. As clarified by the CJEU, "[s]uch an implied refusal implies, by definition, an absolute lack of reasoning" and therefore also a failure to comply with Article 296 TFEU (Case T-300/10 Internationaler Hilfsfond eV, para. 186).

In the event that such minutes do not exist, ClientEarth submits that such failure breaches EU transparency laws.

Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that, "Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen".
Article 15(3) of the Treaty on Functioning of the European Union further develops this principle by giving citizens a right to access documents of the Union’s institutions, “subject to the principles and the conditions to be defined in accordance with this paragraph.”

The detailed principles and conditions of access to documents were defined in Regulation 1049/2001. Recital 2 of the Regulation states that, “[o]penness enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process”. Article 2 states that, “Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, subject to the principles, conditions and limits defined in this Regulation.”

The significance of making legislative documents available to the public has been stressed on a number of occasions by the Courts of Justice of the EU. In joined case C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P Kingdom of Sweden and Maurizio Turco v Council of the European, the Court of Justice stated that, “openness in that respect contributes to strengthening democracy by allowing citizens to scrutinize all the information which has formed the basis of a legislative act. The possibility for citizens to find out the considerations underpinning legislative action is a precondition for the effective exercise of their democratic rights”. These principles were emphasised by the Court of Justice more recently in case C-57/16 ClientEarth v Commission, paragraph 84.

In addition to this, records of the deliberations on TACs at the Agricultural and Fisheries Council and relevant meetings of the Council’s preparatory bodies constitute “environmental information” and, as such, the obligations contained in Regulation 1367/2006 must also be upheld. In case C-57/16 the Court of Justice recalled its consistent case law that states:

"Regulation No 1367/2006 aims, as provided for in Article 1 thereof, to ensure the widest possible systematic availability and dissemination of environmental information…It follows, in essence, from recital 2 of that regulation that the purpose of access to that information is to promote more effective public participation in the decision-making process, thereby increasing, on the part of the competent bodies, the accountability of decision-making and contributing to public awareness and support for the decisions taken". (para. 98)

However, the transparency obligations enshrined in Article 10(3) TEU, Article 15(3) TFEU, Regulation 1049/2001 and Regulation 1367/2006 are contingent on the institutions drawing up and retaining documents relating to their functions. Institutions cannot simply frustrate the right to access documents by failing to document their activities in sufficient detail. Indeed, the (then) Court of First Instance (now the General Court) has recognised that such failure is unlawful.

In Case T-264/04 WWF European Policy Programme v the Council of the European Union, the Court of First Instance held that “it would be contrary to the requirement of transparency which underlies Regulation No 1049/2001 for institutions to rely on the fact that documents do not exist in order to avoid the application of that regulation. In order that the right of access to documents may be exercised effectively, the institutions concerned must, in so far as possible and in a non-arbitrary and predictable manner, draw up and retain documentation relating to their activities.”

Contrary to the present case, in Case T-264/04, the Court of First Instance held that it could not be concluded that the Council, in claiming that minutes of the first agenda item of its Article 133 Committee meeting did not exist, acted in an arbitrary or unpredictable manner. The Court came to this conclusion owing to the “purely informative nature of that item at the meeting and the fact that it did not call for any specific implementing measure”. The same conclusion cannot be applied to the Commission's failure to draw up and retain a record of the discussions leading to the unanimous political agreement for a Regulation which, in many respects, departs significantly from its proposal and which requires implementing legislation at national level.

This is supported by the text of Regulation No. 1049/2001. Recital 2 of the Regulation states that, “[o]penness enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process”. Article 6 very clearly states that “[w]ider access should be granted to documents in cases where the institutions are acting in their legislative capacity, including under delegated powers, while at the same time preserving the effectiveness of the institutions' decision-making process. Such documents should be made directly accessible to the greatest possible extent.”

These considerations are of particular importance in the context of setting TACs. The Commission’s proposed TACs take account of the scientific advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), and have the objective of bringing the stocks to levels that can deliver MSY by achieving the corresponding MSY exploitation rates by "2015 where possible and on a progressive and incremental basis at the latest by 2020". Recital 7 to the CFP Basic Regulation states that, "Achieving those exploitation rates by a later date should be allowed only if achieving them by 2015 would seriously jeopardise the social and economic sustainability of the fishing fleets involved." To fulfil its duty as guardian of the Treaties (and of measures adopted by the institutions pursuant to them, including Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy) under Article 17 TEU, the Commission must defend its proposal during discussions in Council working parties and ministerial meetings. Therefore, in order for EU citizens to be able to scrutinise whether the Commission has fulfilled its role in the decision-making process by adequately defending and explaining its original proposal to the Member States, it must accurately record the discussions leading to the final TACs and quotas adopted by the Council, both at working party level and in the Agriculture and Fisheries Council that took place on 17 and 18 December 2018. Failure to do so breaches ClientEarth's right to access documents of the institutions under Article 2 of Regulation 1049/2001, as well as Article 10 TEU and Article 15 TFEU.

FAILURE TO DISCLOSE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AGREED QUOTA DEDUCTIONS

ClientEarth appreciates the information provided by the Commission relating to the proposed quota deductions (Specifically, the documents titled '4757268 letter Helene Clark to chairs Redacted.pdf', 'FO 2019 and Top downs Presentation to AT Pres and MS Redacted.pdf' and 'YES FO 2019 TAC Proposal Worksheets November 2018 002.pdf'). However, we are concerned that the Commission has not provided any information relating to the agreed quota deductions.

Before the introduction of the landing obligation, TACs effectively were 'Total Allowable Landing' limits, since catches in excess of these TACs could be discarded. This means that when following scientific advice, TACs were based on the scientific advice on landings rather than advice on total catches.

As the landing obligation was gradually phased in between 2015 and 2019, the purpose of TACs changed from regulating landings to regulating catches. Within this timeframe, the catches of many stocks were partially subject to the landing obligation, meaning that a quota 'top-up' was added to what used to be 'Total Allowable Landing' limits, to account for that part of the catch that used to be discarded but now had to be landed. Until December Council 2017, the Commission proposed such quota top-ups, which have subsequently been incorporated into the TACs adopted by the Council. The landing obligation came fully into force in 2019, meaning that all catches of quota stocks in the Northeast Atlantic now have to be landed, unless exemptions apply. As confirmed in the documents provided by the Commission in response to ClientEarth's access to information request, the Commission's approach has therefore changed from proposing landings-TACs plus quota top-ups, to proposing catch-TACs, with deductions applied to TACs subject to certain exemptions, to reflect that certain discards may continue under these exemptions.

Access to information on the agreed deductions is crucial to reliably assess whether the agreed TACs (after deductions have been applied) are in line with scientific advice. The TAC Regulation itself only contains the final agreed TACs, without the applied deduction amount being specified. Therefore, a list of the proposed and agreed adjustments as well as the TACs before the adjustments were applied, is particularly important to allow at least a direct comparison of the ‘adjustment TACs’ with the relevant ICES landings or catch advice, respectively. We note that the agreed TACs exceeds the proposed TACs in a number of cases where the Commission appears to have proposed a quota deduction. For example, for PLE/7DE. (plaice in the English Channel), the Commission proposed a pre-deduction TAC of 12508 t, and applied a 19.12% deduction, resulting in a proposed TAC of 10116 t. However, the agreed TAC was set at 10354 t, without any information on the deducted amount being specified in the TAC Regulation. Similarly, the Commission's proposed pre-deduction TAC for HAD/7X7A34 (Celtic Sea haddock) was 6317 t, resulting in a proposed TAC of 5937 t after the application of a 6.02% deduction, whereas the agreed TAC was set at 8329 t, again without information on the agreed deduction amount being provided.

Additional information on the agreed deductions is therefore needed, where the overall agreed TACs (and therefore presumably the agreed deductions) diverge from the proposed quantities, in order to fully assess the extent to which the agreed TACs were set in line with the CFP's requirements.

This is information that the Commission also needs in order to fulfil its duties as guardian of the Treaties, under Article 17 TEU.

We therefore request that the Commission verify whether it is in possession of documents falling within the scope of our request on this point, in line with the CJEU's case law in case T-653/16 Malta v Commission, para. 63. It should be recalled that failure to disclose existing documents constitutes an implied refusal of access, for the purposes of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1049/2001, read in conjunction with Regulation 1367/2006, and a failure to state reasons in breach of Article 296 TFEU (Case T-300/10 Internationaler Hilfsfond eV, para. 186).

Yours faithfully,

Anne Friel
Lawyer - Environmental Democracy
ClientEarth
60 Avenue du Trone
1050 Brussels

Jenni Grossmann
Science and Policy Advisor - Fisheries
ClientEarth

Direction générale des affaires maritimes et de la pêche

3 Attachments

Dear Ms Friel,

 

Please find attached an advance information copy of the confirmatory
decision taken on your request for access to documents registered under
Gestdem number 2019/0768, adopted on 02/07/2019 in the above-mentioned
case.

 

Please note that the Secretariat General of the European Commission will
proceed with the formal notification of the decision in the coming days.

 

This advance copy is solely sent for your information and is not the
formal notification of the confirmatory decision.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS TEAM (GD)

 

[1]cid:image001.png@01D45409.F767C980

European Commission

Secretariat-General

SG C.1

[2][email address]

 

 

References

Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]