This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TN0470
Case T-470/21: Action brought on 30 July 2021 — Klymenko v Council
Case T-470/21: Action brought on 30 July 2021 — Klymenko v Council
Case T-470/21: Action brought on 30 July 2021 — Klymenko v Council
IO C 412, 11.10.2021, p. 19–20
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
11.10.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 412/19 |
Action brought on 30 July 2021 — Klymenko v Council
(Case T-470/21)
(2021/C 412/20)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: M. Cessieux, lawyer)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
declare the action of Mr. Oleksandr Viktorovytch Klymenko admissible; |
— |
declare that, by adopting the restrictive measures directed against Mr. Klymenko, whether or not they have been annulled, concerning:
|
— |
the Council of the European Union has incurred the European Union’s non-contractual liability; |
— |
declare that, consequently, the European Union is required to compensate the applicant for the resulting damage; |
— |
order the Council of the European Union to compensate the resulting damage to good character and reputation, amounting to EUR 50 000, plus statutory interest and any other sum that may be justified; |
— |
order the Council of the European Union to award the applicant the sum of EUR 500 for each month during which his name was entered on the lists at issue as compensation for the non-material damage resulting from the difficulties caused to his daily life and the damage to his health, to which should be added statutory interest, and any other sum that may be justified; |
— |
order the Council to pay the costs. |
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 insufficient statement of reasons, constituting infringement of the principle of the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection. |
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging error of assessment, resulting from the infringement by the Council of its obligation to establish that the restrictive measures adopted are well founded. |