Inconsistent and Imprecise Explanations: NYT v Commission, Transparency, and the Search for Lost Documents

On May 14, 2025 the Grand Chamber of the General Court handed down its judgment in T-36/23 Stevi and the New York Times Company (NYT) v European Commission. The eagerly-awaited judgment is an unequivocal win for proponents of EU institutional transparency. The Court made short shrift of the Commission’s evasive justifications for refusing access to the requested documents and clarified the core concepts that define the scope of the access to documents regime of Regulation 1049/2001. The judgment clarifies the concept of possession, so as to discourage tactical deletion of documents by institutions, and elaborates on their obligation to provide an explanation for why the requested documents could not be found. Both are linked to the duty of the institutions to proactively promote transparency via document retention practices.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-08-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/840
Primary Topic
Copyright and Intellectual Property
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Inconsistent and Imprecise Explanations: NYT v Commission, Transparency, and the Search for Lost Documents

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Copyright and Intellectual Property
article

Inconsistent and Imprecise Explanations: NYT v Commission, Transparency, and the Search for Lost Documents

article en

Abstract

On May 14, 2025 the Grand Chamber of the General Court handed down its judgment in T-36/23 Stevi and the New York Times Company (NYT) v European Commission. The eagerly-awaited judgment is an unequivocal win for proponents of EU institutional transparency. The Court made short shrift of the Commission’s evasive justifications for refusing access to the requested documents and clarified the core concepts that define the scope of the access to documents regime of Regulation 1049/2001. The judgment clarifies the concept of possession, so as to discourage tactical deletion of documents by institutions, and elaborates on their obligation to provide an explanation for why the requested documents could not be found. Both are linked to the duty of the institutions to proactively promote transparency via document retention practices.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
University of Helsinki (FI)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Copyright and Intellectual Property
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.