# C_2010134EN.01002602.xml

| 22.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/26

---

Action brought on 11 March 2010 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union

(Case C-130/10)

2010/C 134/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Perillo, K. Bradley, A. Auersperger Matić, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul Council Regulation (EU) No 1286/2009 (1) of 22 December 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 (2) imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Council Regulation (EU) No 1286/2009 (1) of 22 December 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 (2) imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban;

o

1

o

2

| — | Order that the effects of Council Regulation (EU) No 1286/2009 be maintained until it is replaced; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order that the effects of Council Regulation (EU) No 1286/2009 be maintained until it is replaced;

o

| — | order Council of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The European Parliament considers that Council Regulation (EU) No 1286/2009 of 22 December 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban is invalid for the following reasons:

| — | having regard to its aim and content, the correct legal basis for the Regulation is Article 75 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its aim and content, the correct legal basis for the Regulation is Article 75 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

| — | in the alternative, the conditions for recourse to Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union were not fulfilled, because no proposal had been validly presented, and the Council had not previously adopted a decision in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title V of the Treaty on the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, the conditions for recourse to Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union were not fulfilled, because no proposal had been validly presented, and the Council had not previously adopted a decision in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title V of the Treaty on the European Union.

Should the Court annul the contested Regulation, Parliament nonetheless proposes that the Court exercise its discretion to maintain the effects of the contested Regulation, in accordance with Article 264, second paragraph, TFEU, until such time as it is replaced.

---

(1)  OJ L 346, p. 42

1

(2)  OJ L 139, p. 9

2

---