Case T‑716/14
Antony C.Tweedale
v
European Food Safety Authority
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber), 7March 2019
(Access to documents— Regulation (EC) No1049/2001— Documents relating to toxicity studies conducted in connection with the renewal of the approval of the active substance glyphosate— Partial refusal to grant access— Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests— Overriding public interest— Regulation (EC) No1367/2006— Concept of information relating to emissions into the environment)
1.EU institutions— Right of public access to documents— Request for access concerning environmental information— Regulation No1367/2006— Information relating to emissions into the environment— Concept— Broad interpretation
(European Parliament and Council Regulations No1049/2001, recital2, Arts1 and 4(2), first indent, and No1367/2006, recital 15 and Art.6(1))
(see paragraphs54-58)
2.EU institutions— Right of public access to documents— Request for access concerning environmental information— Regulation No1367/2006— Information relating to emissions into the environment— Concept— Information concerning actual or foreseeable emissions into the environment— Included
(European Parliament and Council Regulation No1367/2006, Arts1(1)(b), 2(1)(d) and 6(1))
(see paragraphs78-81)
3.EU institutions— Right of public access to documents— Request for access concerning environmental information— Regulation No1367/2006— Information relating to emissions into the environment— Concept— Information relating to the effects of those emissions— Included
(European Parliament and Council Regulation No1367/2006, recital2 and Arts1 and 6(1))
(see paragraphs90-92, 99, 100)
4.Environment— Freedom of access to information— Directive 2003/4— Interpretation— Account taken of the wording and aim of the Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (Aarhus Convention)
(Aarhus Convention, Art. 4(4)(d); European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/4, Art.4(2), second para.)
(see paragraphs93-95)
5.EU institutions— Right of public access to documents— Request for access concerning environmental information— Regulation No1367/2006— Information relating to emissions into the environment— Concept— Studies to determine the toxicity and effects of a substance— Studies carried out in the least favourable conditions and studies carried out in the closest possible conditions to agricultural practice— Included
(European Parliament and Council Regulation No1367/2006, Art.6(1))
(see paragraphs110-113, 118, 119)
Résumé
In the judgment in Tweedale v EFSA (T‑716/14, EU:T:2019:141) of 7March 2019, the Court upheld the application made under Article263 TFEU by MrTweedale for the partial annulment of the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) by which it refused to grant him access to toxicity studies on glyphosate on the basis of Article4(2) of Regulation No1049/2001.(1) EFSA argued that there was no overriding public interest in disclosure of the parts of the requested studies, since they did not constitute information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ for the purposes of Regulation No1367/2006.(2) The applicant relied, inter alia, on an infringement of Article4(2) of Regulation No1049/2001 and of Article6(1) of Regulation No1367/2006, in that the requested studies may be classified as information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ for the purposes of the latter provision.
First of all, the Court observes that an institution of the European Union, hearing a request for access to a document, cannot justify its refusal to divulge it on the basis of the exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a particular natural or legal person, provided for in Article4(2), first indent, of Regulation No1049/2001, where the information contained in that document constitutes information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ for the purposes of Article6(1) of Regulation No1367/2006. In that respect, the Court considered that the question therefore arose whether the information contained in the requested studies constituted information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ for the purposes of that provision.
With regard to the concept of information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’, the Court considered that it cannot be limited to information concerning emissions actually released into the environment when the plant protection product or active substance in question is used on plants or soil, but that that concept also covers information on foreseeable emissions into the environment from the plant protection product or active substance in question, under normal or realistic conditions of use of that product or substance, namely the conditions under which the authorisation to place that product or substance on the market was granted and which prevail in the area where that product or substance is intended to be used.
In that regard the Court held that an active substance contained in plant protection products, such as glyphosate, in the course of normal use, is intended to be discharged into the environment by virtue of its function, and its foreseeable emissions cannot, therefore, be regarded as purely hypothetical, or even simply foreseeable. Given that glyphosate has been authorised in Member States since 2002 and has actually been used in plant protection products, its emissions into the environment are therefore a reality. The requested studies are therefore intended to establish the toxicity of an active substance which is actually present in the environment.
Next the Court stated that, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice, the concept of information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ is not limited to information which makes it possible to assess the emissions as such, but also covers information relating to the effects of those emissions. In that regard, the Court held that the requested studies are intended to determine the limits within which glyphosate, when present in food, does not present any risk in the medium to long term for human health and, thus, to set the various values relating to the consequences of glyphosate emissions on human health. The Court states that, for the studies to be classified as information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’, what matters is not so much the conditions in which those studies were carried out, in particular whether or not they were carried out in a laboratory, but their purpose.
Finally, the Court took the view that the applicant’s access to the requested studies would enable him to understand the manner in which human health could be affected by glyphosate being released into the environment and that, therefore, the requested studies must be regarded as constituting information which ‘relates to emissions into the environment’ for the purposes of Article6(1) of Regulation No1367/2006.
1Regulation (EC) No1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L145, p.43).
2Regulation (EC) No1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6September 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 L264, p.13).