Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011TN0592

Case T-592/11: Action brought on 22 November 2011 — Anbouba v Council

OJ C 25, 28.1.2012, p. 62–62 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

28.1.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/62


Action brought on 22 November 2011 — Anbouba v Council

(Case T-592/11)

(2012/C 25/118)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Issam Anbouba (Homs, Syria) (represented by: M.-A. Bastin and J.-M. Salva, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

Declare this application admissible in all its elements;

Declare it well founded in all its pleas in law;

Grant the joinder of the present application with the application in Case T-563/11;

State that the contested acts may be annulled in part since the part of the acts which is to be annulled can be separated from the act as a whole;

Accordingly

Annul in part Council Decision 2011/684/CFSP of 13 October 2011, and Regulation (EU) No 1011/2011 of 13 October 2011 by deleting the listing of Mr Issam Anbouba and references to him as supporting the current regime in Syria;

Failing that, annul Council Decision 2011/684/CFSP of 13 October 2011 and Regulation (EU) No 1011/2011 of 13 October 2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria;

Failing that, declare those decisions and the regulation inapplicable as regards Issam Anbouba and order the removal of his name and references from the list of persons who are the object of sanctions by the European Union;

Order the Council provisionally to pay one euro in damages as compensation for the non-pecuniary and pecuniary harm suffered by reason of the designation of Mr Issam Anbouba as a supporter of the current regime in Syria;

Order the Council to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant raises two pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-563/11 Anbouba v Council.


Top