Acces la dreptul Uniunii Europene
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">Aflați mai multe despre funcționalitățile experimentale</a>
Alegeți funcționalitățile experimentale pe care doriți să le testați
EUR-Lex
Acces la dreptul Uniunii Europene

Acest document este un extras de pe site-ul EUR-Lex

Sunteți aici
Folosiți ghilimele pentru a căuta o „expresie exactă”. Adăugați un asterisc (*) la un termen pentru a găsi variante (transport*, 32019R*). Puteți folosi semnul întrebării (?) în locul unui caracter din termenul căutat pentru a găsi variante (dacă scrieți ca?, rezultatele căutării vor include caz, cap, cal).
Recomandări pentru căutare
Aveți nevoie de mai multe opțiuni de căutare? Utilizați Căutare avansată

Document 62025TN0518

Case T-518/25: Action brought on 30 July 2025 – Norebo Holding v Council

OJ C, C/2025/5354, 13.10.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5354/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5354/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2025/5354

13.10.2025

Action brought on 30 July 2025 – Norebo Holding v Council

(Case T-518/25)

(C/2025/5354)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Norebo Holding AO (Murmansk, Russia) (represented by: T. Bontinck, M. Brésart and J. Goffin, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

—

annul Decision (CFSP) 2025/966 of 20 May 2025 Decision (CFSP) 2024/2643 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities, in so far as it maintains the applicant’s name on the list annexed to the decision;

—

annul Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/965 of 20 May 2025 implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 concerning the same restrictive measures, in so far as it includes the applicant’s name on the list contained in Annex I to the regulation;

—

order the Council make a provisional payment of EUR 100 000 in compensation for the non-material harm suffered by the applicant;

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging error of assessment

—

The evidence produced by the Council is hypothetical and contradictory, and contains errors of assessment in respect of each of the claims relied upon in support of the grounds for listing the applicant. Consequently, the contested acts are vitiated by errors of assessment.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality

—

The acts at issue are based on purely hypothetical claims and not on proven activities. The objective of preventing such scenarios becoming fact may be attained by measures that are less restrictive than the imposition of the restrictive measures at issue. Consequently, the acts at issue breach the principle of proportionality.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5354/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Sus