# C_2011130EN.01001701.xml

| 30.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/17

---

Action brought on 2 March 2011 — Attey v Council

(Case T-118/11)

2011/C 130/30

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Philipp Attey (Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire) (represented by: J. –C. Tchikaya, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire, and Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d'Ivoire, to the extent that they concern the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire, and Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d'Ivoire, to the extent that they concern the applicant;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant puts forward four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law alleging a manifest error of assessment, in so far as the restrictive measures taken against the applicant on the ground that he is obstructing the process of peace and reconciliation in Côte d’Ivoire and refuses to accept the result of the presidential election are based on the fact that the defendant wrongly considered that A. Ouattara had been elected president of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, whereas L. Gbagbo was declared elected president by the Constitutional Council. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law alleging a manifest error of assessment, in so far as the restrictive measures taken against the applicant on the ground that he is obstructing the process of peace and reconciliation in Côte d’Ivoire and refuses to accept the result of the presidential election are based on the fact that the defendant wrongly considered that A. Ouattara had been elected president of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, whereas L. Gbagbo was declared elected president by the Constitutional Council.

| 2. | Second plea in law alleging a misuse of powers, in so far as the contested acts (i) pursue an aim other than that defined in Article 21 TEU, namely the advancement in the wider world of democracy and of the rule of law, L. Gbagbo having been proclaimed president of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire in a democratic manner and (ii) infringe the Charter of the United Nations, of which the European Union promotes the observance, the defendant having disregarded the principle of non-interference in a State's internal affairs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law alleging a misuse of powers, in so far as the contested acts (i) pursue an aim other than that defined in Article 21 TEU, namely the advancement in the wider world of democracy and of the rule of law, L. Gbagbo having been proclaimed president of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire in a democratic manner and (ii) infringe the Charter of the United Nations, of which the European Union promotes the observance, the defendant having disregarded the principle of non-interference in a State's internal affairs.

| 3. | Third plea in law alleging an infringement of Article 215(3) TFEU, the contested acts not containing any legal safeguard. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law alleging an infringement of Article 215(3) TFEU, the contested acts not containing any legal safeguard.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law alleging an infringement of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,






  — | in that the rights of the defence of the applicant have been infringed, in so far as the defendant has not notified him of the evidence held against him, thereby not allowing the applicant duly to present his point of view in that regard, and |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law alleging an infringement of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

in that the rights of the defence of the applicant have been infringed, in so far as the defendant has not notified him of the evidence held against him, thereby not allowing the applicant duly to present his point of view in that regard, and

| — | in that there has been an infringement of the right to property of the applicant to a disproportionate extent. |
| --- | --- |

—

in that there has been an infringement of the right to property of the applicant to a disproportionate extent.

---