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 62018TN0249

Case T-249/18: Action brought on 16 April 2018 — Saab Halabi v Council

IO C 200, 11.6.2018, p. 50–50 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

201805250521897062018/C 200/642492018TC20020180611EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180416505011

Case T-249/18: Action brought on 16 April 2018 — Saab Halabi v Council

Top

C2002018EN5010120180416EN0064501501

Action brought on 16 April 2018 — Saab Halabi v Council

(Case T-249/18)

2018/C 200/64Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tarek William Saab Halabi (Venezuela) (represented by: L. Giuliano and F. Di Gianni, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/90 of 22 January 2018 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/88 of 22 January 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2063 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela, in so far as their provisions concern the applicant; and

—

order the Council to bear the costs of the proceedings.

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 that the Council infringed the principle of sound administration and breached his rights of defense and to effective judicial protection by failing to provide access to the evidence allegedly supporting his listing within a reasonable period of time.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the Council did not prove the existence of the conditions for his listing and committed a manifest error of assessment since it failed to demonstrate that, in his role as attorney general and previous roles as ombudsman and president of the Republican Moral Council, the applicant has undermined democracy and the rule of law in Venezuela.
Top