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 62011TN0384

    Case T-384/11: Action brought on 22 July 2011 — Safa Nicu Sepahan v Council

    OJ C 282, 24.9.2011, p. 31–32 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    22/07/2011
    Date lodged:
    22/07/2011
    Author:
    General Court
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    English
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    Link

    24.9.2011   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 282/31

    Action brought on 22 July 2011 — Safa Nicu Sepahan v Council

    (Case T-384/11)

    2011/C 282/63

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Safa Nicu Sepahan (Isfahan, Iran) (represented by: A. Bahrami, lawyer)

    Defendant: Council of the European Union

    Form of order sought

    —

    Declare that entry No. 19 of Annex VIII to Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1), as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2011 of 23 May 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 136, p. 26), is null and void;

    —

    Declare that the defendant has violated Article 265 TFEU by failing to examine the applicant’s request dated 7 June 2011 for reconsideration of entry No 19;

    —

    Order removal of the name of the applicant from EU list of sanctions;

    —

    Award the applicant compensation, for an amount to be determined in the course of the present proceedings, but not less than EUR 2 000 000,00; and

    —

    Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s 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 that the Council committed a manifest error of appreciation as the inclusion of the name of the applicant on the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures is erroneous, misleading, unspecific, incomplete and, therefore, plainly illegal.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging that the Council has manifestly failed to state the reasons for the inclusion of the name of the applicant on the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures.
    Top