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 62012TN0203

Case T-203/12: Action brought on 16 May 2012 — Alchaar v Council

OJ C 217, 21.7.2012, p. 24–25 (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:
16/05/2012
Date lodged:
16/05/2012
Author:
General Court
Form:
Judicial information
Authentic language:
French
Link
Select all documents mentioning this document
Case affecting:
Link

21.7.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/24

Action brought on 16 May 2012 — Alchaar v Council

(Case T-203/12)

2012/C 217/52

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mohamad Nedal Alchaar (Alep, Syria) (represented by: A. Korkmaz, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

—

annul, as far as those acts concern the applicant:

—

Implementing Regulation No 1244/2011 of 1 December 2011;

—

Decision No 2011/782/CFSP as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by implementing Decision No 2012/37/CFSP, Decision 2012/122/CFSP, Implementing Decision 2012/172/CFSP and Decision 2012/206/CFSP;

—

Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 of 18 January 2012 as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by Implementing Regulation No 55/2012, Regulation No 168/2012 and Implementing Regulation No 266/2012

—

All future acts amending or supplementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation No 36/2012

—

annul the Council’s decision in its letter of 16 March 2012 addressed to the applicant, in so far as it maintains his inclusion on the contested lists;

—

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 an infringement of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees, in particular rights, the duty to state reasons and the principle of effective judicial protection, in so far as the applicant did not receive formal notification of his inclusion on the list of persons sanctioned and or the grounds for his inclusion in the contested acts and were not sufficient to justify the sanctions.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the right to property and economic freedom.
Top