The court rejected the explanation of court of first instance according to which the the claim was not specific enough and can be refused by the Aarhus Convention. Quite important that in this decision the claimed enviromental data is considered and emphasised being a public interest data according to the very law on privacy and access to public interest data.
The defendant has to present its evidences in during the encored proceeding since the court of first instance did not evaluated them. According to the very rule the data processing institution has to verify the reasons of denial, the court of second instance does not practice verification. Experts are justified to get involved in such a process in order to allocate the data counting as trade secret.
The court underlined that in a public interest access case the defendant cannot refer to reasons (such as national security interests) that did not even exist when refusing the requested data.
The case continues at the Metropolitan Court of Budapest following the orders of the Capital Court of Appeal.