EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-11/18 P: Appeal brought on 5 January 2018 by Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 8 November 2017 in Case T-245/15: Klymenko v Council

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CN0011

62018CN0011

January 5, 2018
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

12.3.2018

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/12

(Case C-11/18 P)

(2018/C 094/15)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko (represented by: M. Phelippeau, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should set aside the Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 November 2017 in Case T-245/15.

The appellant requests the Court to grant the relief sought in the proceedings before the General Court below namely:

to annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/364 of 5 March 2015 (1); and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/357 of 5 March 2015 (2);

to annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/318 of 4 March 2016 (3), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/311 of 4 March 2016 (4);

to annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/381 of 3 March 2017 (5); and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/374 of 3 March 2017 (6),

in so far as those measures concern the Appellant; and to order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs of the appeal and the application for annulment in the statement of modification.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his appeal, the appellant puts forward three grounds.

First, he claims that the General Court was wrong to consider that the Council of the European Union had identified actual and specific reasons justifying the imposition of restrictive measures on him and that the General Court was wrong to describe the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office as being a ‘high judicial authority’.

Second, he submits that the General Court was wrong to consider that listing criterion contained in the acts at issue corresponded to the objectives of the CFSP.

Third, he maintains that the General Court erred in law in concluding that the restrictive measure was not constitutive of an infringement of the rights to property.

(1) Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/364 of 5 March 2015 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2015 L 62 p. 25)

(2) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/357 of 5 March 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2015 L 62, p. 1)

(3) Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/318 of 4 March 2016 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2016 L 60, p. 76);

(4) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/311 of 4 March 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2016 L 60, p. 1);

(5) Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/381 of 3 March 2017 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2017 L 58, p. 34);

(6) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/374 of 3 March 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2017 L 58, p. 1)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia