08 May 2013 г.

A copy of the contract was requested by Krasimir Russev in January 2012. The secretary of the Municipality of Targovishte sought the consent of the third party - the purchasing company, which had eventually dissented a disclosure. The secretary thus provided an extract from the public register of the municipal real-estate property sales. The partial access was challenged before the Administrative court – Targovishte which dissmissed the appeal with the argument that the request for acecss to a copy of a document was not a request for access to information which is a ground enough for a complete refusal. 

 

By a Decision of 9 April 2013, the Supreme Administrative Court (in Bulgarian) repealed a decision of the Administrative court – Targovishte, as well as the refusal of the Targovishte Municipality mayor to provide a copy of the contract for sale of a municipal real-estate property (a former market place) to a private company.

 

The court notes that the APIA provides a presumption of overriding public interest of disclosure when the information sought is related to the parties, subcontractors, the subject, the price, the rights and obligations, conditions, terms, and sanctions specified in contracts where one of the contracting parties is an obliged body under Article 3 of the APIA.

 

Thus, the mayor, respectively the officials empowered by her/him, had the obligation to provide the information or to establish the lack of overriding public interest. There is no reasoning on the lack of such an interest in the municipality secretary’s decision, upon whom rests the burden of proof of rebutting the statutory presumption. Therefore, under the statutory presumption of the APIA, which failed to be rebutted in this case, it should be held that there is overriding public interest of disclosure of the requested public information.