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 T-91/25: Action brought on 7 February 2025 – Troost v Council

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62025TN0091

62025TN0091

February 7, 2025
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

EN

C series

C/2025/1668

24.3.2025

(Case T-91/25)

(C/2025/1668)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Niels Oscar Troost (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Lester, Barrister-at-Law, and C. Filippitsch, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/3182 of 16 December 2024 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/3183 of 16 December 2024 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">2</span>) in so far as they apply to the applicant; and

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, alleging manifest errors of assessment.

The applicant alleges that he is not, and has not since 2018 been, associated with Livna Shipping Ltd; and even if one were to assume that the activities of Paramount DMCC - for the short period where it continued to trade in Russian-origin oil after the introduction of the EU price cap - could (in principle) amount to circumvention or frustration notwithstanding the absence of any relevant EU nexus (which it can not), those activities ceased over eighteen months ago.

The consequence is that this is incapable of demonstrating that Paramount DMCC (let alone the applicant) is currently involved in such activities.

(1) Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/3182 of 16 December 2024 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ L, 2024/3182).

(2) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/3183 of 16 December 2024 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 L, 2024/3183).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1668/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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