Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document 62018TN0308

Case T-308/18: Action brought on 17 May 2018 — Hamas v Council

OJ C 259, 23.7.2018, p. 43–44 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

201807060611993552018/C 259/583082018TC25920180723EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180517434421

Case T-308/18: Action brought on 17 May 2018 — Hamas v Council

Top

C2592018EN4310120180517EN0058431442

Action brought on 17 May 2018 — Hamas v Council

(Case T-308/18)

2018/C 259/58Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Hamas (Doha, Qatar) (represented by: L. Glock, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/475 of 21 March 2018 updating the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2017/1426 (OJ 2018 L 79, p. 26);

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/468 of 21 March 2018 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1420 (OJ 2018 L 79, p. 7);

in so far as those measures apply to Hamas, including Hamas-Izz al-Din al-Qassem;

—

order the Council to pay all of the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on seven pleas in law:

1.

First plea in law: infringement of Article 1(4) of Common Position 2001/931.

2.

Second plea in law: errors committed by the Council as to the accuracy of the factual allegations made against the applicant.

3.

Third plea in law: mistaken characterisation by the Council of Hamas as a terrorist group.

4.

Fourth plea in law: infringement of the principle of non-interference.

5.

Fifth plea in law: failure to take sufficient account of the development of the situation owing to the passage of time.

6.

Sixth plea in law: infringement of the obligation to state reasons.

7.

Seventh plea in law: infringement of the rights of defence and of the right to effective judicial protection.
Top