EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/30

(Case T-190/16)

(2016/C 222/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul 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) and 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), in so far as they concern the applicant;

—terminate certain judicial measures, in particular:

—questions to the Council;

—the invitation to the Council to comment, in writing or orally, on certain aspects of the case;

—requests for information to the Council and third parties, in particular to the Commission, EADS and Ukraine;

—the invitation to submit documents or pieces of evidence in connection with the case;

—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 four pleas in law.

1.First plea in law: Infringement of basic rights

In the context of this plea in law, the applicant asserts the infringement of the right to property and the infringement of the freedom to conduct a business. In addition, he criticises the excessiveness of the restrictive measures imposed.

2.Second plea in law: Abuse of discretion

In this regard, the applicant asserts inter alia that the Council misused its powers because, by imposing restrictive measures against the applicant, aims other than the consolidation and supporting of the rule of law and the respect of human rights in Ukraine were predominantly pursued.

3.Third plea in law: Infringement of the principle of sound administration

In the context of this plea in law, the applicant complains in particular of the infringement of the right to impartial treatment, the infringement of the right to just or fair treatment and the infringement of the right to a careful investigation of the facts.

4.Fourth plea in law: Manifest errors of assessment