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 62018TN0286

    Case T-286/18: Action brought on 7 May 2018 — Azarov v Council

    OJ C 240, 9.7.2018, p. 52–52 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    201806220591970182018/C 240/602862018TC24020180709EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180507525211

    Case T-286/18: Action brought on 7 May 2018 — Azarov v Council

    Top

    C2402018EN5210120180507EN0060521521

    Action brought on 7 May 2018 — Azarov v Council

    (Case T-286/18)

    2018/C 240/60Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: A. Egger and G. Lansky, lawyers)

    Defendant: Council of the European Union

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    Annul, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 48) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 5), in so far as they relate to the applicant;

    —

    order specific measures of organisation pursuant to Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court; and

    —

    order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

    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 infringement of the principle of proportionality

    The applicant claims that the restrictive measures, which have now been ordered for the fifth time, are clearly disproportionate.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging manifest errors of assessment

    The applicant submits that the Council did not have a sufficiently solid factual basis, as required pursuant to case-law, in order to take the decision to extend the restrictive measures.
    Top