Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62022TN0635

    Case T-635/22: Action brought on 12 October 2022 — Fridman and Others v Council

    OJ C 451, 28.11.2022, p. 21–21 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    28.11.2022   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 451/21

    Action brought on 12 October 2022 — Fridman and Others v Council

    (Case T-635/22)

    (2022/C 451/25)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicants: Mikhail Fridman (London, United Kingdom), Petr Aven (Virginia Water, United Kingdom), German Khan (London) (represented by: T. Marembert and A. Bass, lawyers)

    Defendant: Council of the European Union

    Form of order sought

    The applicants claim that the Court should:

    —

    annul Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1273 of 21 July 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (1) in so far as it concerns the applicants;

    and

    —

    order the Council to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging lack of any legal basis. According to the applicants, the Council cannot impose any positive obligations, particularly where they are so burdensome, on the persons on which it imposes sanctions.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging lack of any legal basis and infringement of Articles 4, 5, 25 and 40 TEU and Articles 3, 4, 82, 83 and 215 TFEU. The applicants claim, in that connection, that, by requiring Member States to treat any deviation from the Council’s requirement to declare assets as a circumvention of sanctions, the Council, which is aware that the circumvention of sanctions is a criminal offence in 25 of the 27 Member States, has acted as a legislative authority in criminal matters.

    (1)  OJ 2022 L 194, p. 1.

    Top