If the assertion of parliamentary privilege is the basis for not releasing information to a requester but the government institution listening to an assertion made by someone who works in the House of Commons or the Senate uses other exemptions or exclusions to withhold the information, notwithstanding that no exemption or exclusion under the act applies directly, what is the impact on requesters' rights when they are provided with, in effect, a false reason or a misleading reason to refuse disclosure?

In such a case, in order to sustain a claim of privilege, the assembly or member seeking this immunity must show that the sphere of activity for which privilege is claimed is so closely and directly connected with the fulfilment by the assembly or its members of their functions as a legislative and deliberative body, including the assembly's work in holding the government to account, that outside interference would undermine the level of autonomy required to enable the assembly and its members to do their legislative work with dignity and efficiency.

Claiming seniority after registration of the Community trade mark

12 Article 35 of Regulation No 40/94, entitled ‘Claiming seniority after registration of the Community trade mark’, provides:

To prevent abuses cloaked in the guise of privilege from trumping legitimate Charter interests, the courts must inquire into the legitimacy of a claim of parliamentary privilege.

4. A subsequent application for a design which was the subject of a previous first application, and which is filed in or in respect of the same State, shall be considered as the first application for the purpose of determining priority, provided that, at the date of the filing of the subsequent application, the previous application has been withdrawn, abandoned or refused without being open to public inspection and without leaving any rights outstanding, and has not served as a basis for claiming priority.