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 62022TN0243

    Case T-243/22: Action brought on 3 May 2022 — Pšonka v Council

    OJ C 244, 27.6.2022, p. 41–41 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
    OJ C 244, 27.6.2022, p. 40–40 (GA)

    Date of document:
    03/05/2022
    Date lodged:
    03/05/2022
    Author:
    General Court
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    Czech
    Type of procedure:
    Action for annulment
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    Link

    27.6.2022   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 244/41

    Action brought on 3 May 2022 — Pšonka v Council

    (Case T-243/22)

    (2022/C 244/56)

    Language of the case: Czech

    Parties

    Applicant: Artem Viktorovyč Pšonka (Kramatorsk, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

    Defendant: Council of the European Union

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/376 of 3 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/375 of 3 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, to the extent to which they relate to the applicant;

    —

    order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

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

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to sound administration.

    —

    The applicant claims in support of his action, inter alia, that the Council of the European Union did not act with due care and attention in the adoption of the contested decision, since before the adoption of the contested decision it did not address the applicant’s arguments and the evidence he had adduced, which supports his case, and it primarily based its decision on information provided by the Ukrainian institutions and did not request any supplementary information on the course of the investigations in the Ukraine.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s right to property.

    —

    The applicant claims in this connection that the restrictions adopted against him are disproportionate, go beyond what is necessary and amount to an infringement of guarantees under international law of protection of the applicant’s right to property.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s fundamental rights guaranteed under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

    —

    The applicant claims in this connection that in the adoption of the restrictive measures against him, his right to a fair trial and to the presumption of innocence were infringed, as were his rights of the defence and his right to the protection of private property.
    Top