Climate Litigation Meets EU Transparency: Action Involving the CJEU’s Access-to-Documents Regime

A newly filed action before the General Court of the European Union (Case T-489/25, Krüßmann v Court of Justice of the European Union) brings together two themes that have become increasingly prominent in EU public law: climate-related litigation and institutional transparency. 

The case concerns a refusal by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), acting in its administrative capacity, to grant access to documents relating to a 2024 discussion on climate change litigation. More notably, the action also appears to challenge the legality of aspects of the CJEU’s own internal rules on public access to administrative documents. As a result, the proceedings may prove relevant not only for access-to-documents practice, but also for the broader question of how far EU institutions may regulate the limits of transparency through internally adopted rules.

Background

The applicant, who has previously been involved in climate-related constitutional proceedings before the German Federal Constitutional Court, requested access to notes, minutes and presentation materials relating to a June 2024 session of the Superior Courts Network (SCN), a cooperation platform established by the European Court of Human Rights. The request concerned a session entitled “National Courts and the challenge of climate change litigation.”

The CJEU refused access, relying on the exception for the protection of international relations. Following rejection of a confirmatory application in June 2025, the applicant brought an action for annulment under Article 263 TFEU.

A notable institutional feature

The case is unusual because it concerns an access-to-documents decision adopted by the CJEU in the exercise of its administrative functions. In that context, the contested measure is not judicial in nature, but administrative, and may therefore be subject to review by the General Court acting in its judicial capacity.

The action appears to go further, however. In one of his pleas, the applicant challenges the legality of part of the CJEU’s 2019 decision governing public access to documents held by the institution when acting administratively. According to the application, limitations on the right of access must be laid down through the legislative framework contemplated by Article 15(3) TFEU and cannot validly be introduced solely through an internal institutional decision.

That aspect of the case gives it significance beyond the individual access request. It raises the question to what extent the CJEU, like other EU institutions, may rely on internally adopted rules to define the scope and limits of public access to documents held in the exercise of administrative functions.

Additional issues raised by the action

The proceedings also raises a number of substantive questions.

First, they may require the General Court to consider whether documents relating to discussions of climate litigation can qualify as “environmental information” for the purposes of the Aarhus framework, which regulates access to environmental information.

Second, the case may further clarify the distinction between the CJEU’s judicial and administrative activities, in particular where participation in inter-court networks or external institutional exchanges is concerned.

Third, the applicant reportedly argues that the CJEU failed to consult the originating third parties before refusing access to the requested documents. That issue may bring into focus the interaction between the Aarhus regime and the general EU access-to-documents framework under Regulation 1049/2001.

Why it matters

The case may clarify the transparency obligations that apply to the CJEU when it acts administratively, as well as the limits of internally adopted access-to-documents rules. It may also test whether climate-related materials can attract enhanced disclosure arguments under the Aarhus framework.