This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017TN0216
Case T-216/17: Action brought on 7 April 2017 — Mabrouk v Council
Case T-216/17: Action brought on 7 April 2017 — Mabrouk v Council
Case T-216/17: Action brought on 7 April 2017 — Mabrouk v Council
OJ C 195, 19.6.2017, p. 34–34
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
19.6.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 195/34 |
Action brought on 7 April 2017 — Mabrouk v Council
(Case T-216/17)
(2017/C 195/47)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Mohamed Marouen Ben Ali Ben Mohamed Mabrouk (Tunis, Tunisia) (represented by: J-R. Farthouat, N. Boulay, lawyers, and S. Crosby, Solicitor)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/153 of 27 January 2017 amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2017 L 23, p. 19) insofar as it applies to the applicant; and |
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law, alleging that the freeze of the applicant’s assets infringes the reasonable time rule of Articles 6 and 47 of the ECHR and the EU fundamental Rights charter respectively. |
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging that there is an insufficient basis for the freeze:
|
3. |
Third plea in law, alleging that, by freezing his assets after the fall of President Ben Ali, the freeze infringes the applicant’s right to work. |
4. |
Fourth plea in law, alleging that the freeze is in any event disproportionate and infringes the applicant’s property rights. |