17.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/73

(Case T-293/23)

(2023/C 252/88)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: EuroChem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Tuominen and M. Krestiyanova, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—partially annul, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, (1) Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/572 of 13 March 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, (1) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/571 of 13 March 2023 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) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/806 of 13 April 2023 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (3) and Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/811 of 13 April 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, (4) and (3) any subsequent Council Decision (CFSP) and Council Implementing Regulation, in so far as those acts incorrectly associate the Applicant to Mr and Mrs Melnichenko, Mr Rashevsky or certain alleged activities;

—order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the contested measures are vitiated by a manifest error of assessment for including applicant’s name in the statement of reasons of the lists of the persons to whom restrictive measures apply.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the contested measures infringe the rights of defence and the right to a fair hearing in that they do not provide the applicant with the possibility to effectively exercise its rights of defence, in particular the right to be heard. Given the close relationship between the right of defence and the right to effective judicial review, the applicant’s right to effective judicial remedy has also been infringed.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the contested measures are disproportionate, encroach upon the Union’s legislative competences and breach the applicant’s fundamental rights.

Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/572 of 13 March 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2023 L 75I, p. 134).

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/571 of 13 March 2023 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 2023 L 75I, p. 1).

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/806 of 13 April 2023 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 2023 L 101, p. 1).

Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/811 of 13 April 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2023 L 101, p. 67).