- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 18 November 2005. # Abdelghani Selmani v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities. # Common foreign and security policy - Council common positions - Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism - Action for annulment - Manifest lack of jurisdiction - Time-limits - Admissibility. # Case T-299/04.
ECLI:EU:T:2005:404
62004TO0299
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
(Case T-299/04)
Common foreign and security policy – Common positions from the Council – Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism – Action for annulment – Manifest lack of jurisdiction – Time-limits – Admissibility
3. Procedure – Admissibility of actions – Assessment by reference to the situation when the application was lodged – Decision replacing the contested decision adopted while the proceedings are under way – Amendment of the original forms of order sought and pleas in law – No effect as regards the decision as to the admissibility of the action (see paras 68-70)
Re:
ACTION for annulment of, first, Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (OJ 2001 L 344, p. 70) and, secondly, Article 1 of Council Decision 2004/306/EC of 2 April 2004 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2003/902/EC (OJ 2004 L 99, p. 28) and all decisions adopted by the Council on the basis of Regulation No 2580/2001 and having the same effect as Decision 2004/306, in so far as those measures apply to the applicant.
Operative part
The Court:
Dismisses the action as manifestly inadmissible;
Orders the applicant to pay the costs.