Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2024/5499

23.9.2024

(Case C-480/24, Čiekuri-Shishki)

(C/2024/5499)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant in the appeal by way of protest in cassation: Ģenerālprokuratūra

Other parties in the proceedings: SIA ČIEKURI-SHISHKI, SIA COUNTRY HELI

Questions referred

1.What circumstances indicate that a person is an associated person within the meaning of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (1)? And must a legal person be regarded as an associated legal person if 50 % of its shares belong to a legal person and the beneficial owner of the latter is a natural person appearing on the list in the annex to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/336 of 28 February 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine? (2)

2.If the second part of the first question referred for a preliminary ruling is answered in the affirmative, must a legal person also be regarded as an associated legal person within the meaning of Article 2 of Regulation No 269/2014 if it holds 50 % of the shares in the legal person described in the second part of the first question referred for a preliminary ruling?

3.Do the persons, entities or bodies mentioned in Article 11(1)(b) of Regulation No 269/2014 also include associated legal persons within the meaning of Article 2 of Regulation No 269/2014?

4.Is a court obliged, when examining any claim, to verify on its own initiative whether any of the parties to the proceedings is one of the persons mentioned in Article 2 or Article 11(1)(a) or (b) of Regulation No 269/2014?

5.What are the legal effects of Article 11(1) of Regulation No 269/2014, which provides that ‘no claims’ made by the persons mentioned in points (a) or (b) of that paragraph ‘shall be satisfied’? Or would it be permissible for the substance of those claims to be heard and determined if the operative part of the court’s judgment contained a statement that the judgment may not be enforced as long as those persons appear on the list concerned?

6.Does Article 11(1) of Regulation No 269/2014 produce legal effects where the applicant is not one of the persons mentioned in points (a) or (b) of that paragraph, but the defendant is one of the persons mentioned in points (a) or (b) of that paragraph?

7.Should data relating to the natural person affected by sanctions (first name and surname) be disclosed in the legal grounds of the court’s decision? And should those personal data be pseudonymised when the court’s decision is published?

*

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5499/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—