Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document C2007/117/36

    Case T-76/07: Action brought on 12 March 2007 — El Fatmi v Council of the European Union

    IO C 117, 26.5.2007, p. 22–23 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
    IO C 117, 26.5.2007, p. 21–22 (MT)

    26.5.2007   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 117/22

    Action brought on 12 March 2007 — El Fatmi v Council of the European Union

    (Case T-76/07)

    (2007/C 117/36)

    Language of the case: Dutch

    Parties

    Applicant: Nouriddin El Fatmi (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: M.J.G. Uiterwaal, lawyer)

    Defendant: Council of the European Union

    Form of order sought

    —

    Common Position 2002/402/CSFP (OJ 2002 L 344, p. 93) is, in the case of the applicant, wrongly used as the basis for Regulation 2001/2580/EC (OJ 2001 L 344, p. 70) and so the regulation is not binding on the applicant;

    —

    in any event, that regulation should not be applied as against the applicant;

    —

    in any event, Decision 2006/1008/EC of 21 December 2006 (OJ 2006 L 379, p. 123) should be annulled;

    —

    the Council should be ordered to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    The pleas and main arguments raised by the applicant are the same as in Case T-75/07 Hamdi v Council, apart from the last plea, which is not raised by the applicant in the present case.

    Top