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 62024TN0221

Case T-221/24: Action brought on 26 April 2024 – Pumpyanskiy v Council

OJ C, C/2024/3919, 1.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3919/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3919/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2024/3919

1.7.2024

Action brought on 26 April 2024 – Pumpyanskiy v Council

(Case T-221/24)

(C/2024/3919)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alexander Dmitrievich Pumpyanskiy (Conches, Switzerland) (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and M. Brésart, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/847 of 12 March 2024 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine in so far as it includes the applicant’s name on the list annexed to that decision;

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/849 of 12 March 2024 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine in so far as it includes the applicant’s name on the list in Annex I to that regulation;

—

order the Council 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 infringement of the right to effective judicial protection and failure to meet the obligation to state reasons.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment.

3.

Third plea in law, alleging failure to observe the principle of proportionality.

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the rights of the defence and impropriety in the procedure for renewal.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3919/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Top