- 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
Case T-286/19: Action brought on 3 May 2019 — Azarov v Council
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0286
62019TN0286
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
24.6.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 213/78
(Case T-286/19)
(2019/C 213/74)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 1), in so far as they relate to the applicant;
—order specific measures of organisation pursuant to Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, in particular:
a)invite the Council to submit documents on the examination of the observance of the rights of the defence and of the right to effective legal protection and on the examination of the validity of the allegations; and
b)invite the EEAS to submit documents on the examination of the observance of the rights of the defence and of the right to effective legal protection;
—order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant claims that the challenged legal acts are vitiated by a manifest error of assessment.
First, the applicant complains of infringement of the defendant’s formal examination obligations, in particular with regard to independent examination, examination of jurisdiction and observance of the rights of the defence and of the right to effective judicial protection. In this regard, he claims that the defendant has not complied with its obligations set out in the judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2018, Azarov v Council (C-530/17 P, EU:C:2018:1031).
Further, the applicant relies on an infringement of the defendant’s duty to state reasons, as it failed to examine the validity of the allegations made against the applicant.