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-494/24 P: Appeal brought on 16 July 2024 by Issam Anbouba against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 15 May 2024 in Case T-471/22 Issam Anbouba v Council of the European Union

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0494

62024CN0494

July 16, 2024
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C series

C/2024/5224

(Case C-494/24 P)

(C/2024/5224)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties

Appellant: Issam Anbouba (represented by: St. Koev, advokat)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

annul in part the judgment of the General Court of the European Union (Fifth Chamber) of 15 May 2024, in Case T-471/22 (1), Issam Anbouba v Council of the European Union and

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1035 (2) of 25 May 2023 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1027 (3) of 25 May 2023 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, in so far as Mr Issam Anbouba was added to the list of persons subject to sanctions, or refer the case back to the General Court on this point for a ruling on the substance;

order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs of the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

1.Error of law on the part of the General Court, consisting in a breach of EU law, in so far as it considered that the Council was entitled to presume that he is a leading business person and to identify the founders of Cham Holding to include them, on that basis, on the Council’s lists;

2.Error of law on the part of the General Court, consisting in a breach of the rules of administration of evidence, in so far as it failed to examine evidence adduced by the appellant and in so far as it gave unjustified priority to evidence submitted by the Council and to parts of that evidence.

3.Error of law on the part of the General Court, consisting in a breach of the rules of procedure to the detriment of the appellant’s interests, in so far as it did not take into consideration evidence submitted by the appellant and in so far as it gave unjustified priority to evidence submitted by the Council and to parts of that evidence.

(1) EU:T:2024:315

(2) OJ 2023 L 139, p. 49.

(3) OJ 2023 L 139, p. 1.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5224/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

* * *

Language of the case: Bulgarian

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