This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019TJ0124
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 February 2021.#Ferdinand Ilunga Luyoyo v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – Freezing of funds – Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded – Manifest error of assessment – Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures – Right to private and family life – Presumption of innocence – Proportionality – Plea of illegality.#Case T-124/19.
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 February 2021.
Ferdinand Ilunga Luyoyo v Council of the European Union.
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – Freezing of funds – Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded – Manifest error of assessment – Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures – Right to private and family life – Presumption of innocence – Proportionality – Plea of illegality.
Case T-124/19.
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 February 2021.
Ferdinand Ilunga Luyoyo v Council of the European Union.
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – Freezing of funds – Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded – Manifest error of assessment – Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures – Right to private and family life – Presumption of innocence – Proportionality – Plea of illegality.
Case T-124/19.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2021:63