30.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/48

(Case T-193/22)

(2022/C 213/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: OT (represented by: J.-P. Hordies and C. Sand, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/427 of 15 March 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 (OJ 2022 L 87, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant;

—annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/429 of 15 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 87, p. 1) in so far as it concerns the applicant;

—order the Council to bear the full costs and expenses of the proceedings, including those incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on seven pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging that Article 1(d) and (g) of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/330 of 25 February 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 51, p. 1) are unlawful, and infringement of the principles of equal treatment, legal certainty and sound administration.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 7 and 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, infringement of Articles 2 and 3 of the New York Convention on the Rights of the Child and infringement of Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

3.Third plea in law, alleging breach of the obligation to state reasons.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the rights of the defence.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging manifest error in the assessment of the facts.

6.Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of the general principle of proportionality.

7.Seventh plea in law, alleging a disproportionate infringement of the right to property, the freedom to conduct a business and the right to pursue a profession.