Thanks to tweets of @ksnhlaw, we now know that this information was made available by the EU Concil on 5 July 2011 by two separate documents with reference to the related cases C-295/11 and C-274/11
The following objections were raised by the two reluctant countries:
- Lack of competence and violation of Article 20(1) first subparagraph TUE: the Union has no competence to establish an enhanced cooperation in the field of Article 118 TFEU for the creation of a new Union intellectual property title.
- Misuse of powers: the envisaged enhanced cooperation does not aim to further the objectives of the Union but to circumvent the unanimity requirement in Article 118(2)
- Non respect of essential requirements to establish an enhanced cooperation, particularly those laid down in Article 20(2) TEU (last resort condition and impossibility to attain the objectives in a reasonable period by the Union as a whole).
- Violation of Articles 118 and 326 TFEU and 20(1) second subparagraph TUE: the enhanced cooperation does not realise a uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the Union and hinders the functioning of the internal market since it creates obstacles to trade between Members States and disorts competition.
(Photo 2006 by Miki, Queen of Planet Goodaboom, via Flickr)