# C_2015213EN.01004001.xml

| 29.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/40

---

Action brought on 5 May 2015 — Haswani v Council

(Case T-231/15)

(2015/C 213/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: George Haswani (Yabroud, Syria) (represented by: G. Karouni, 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 Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/375 of 6 March 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria insofar as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/375 of 6 March 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria insofar as it concerns the applicant;

| — | annul Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/383 of 6 March 2015 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria insofar as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/383 of 6 March 2015 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria insofar as it concerns the applicant;

| — | order, as a result, that Mr George Haswani’s name be removed from the annexes to the above-mentioned acts; |
| --- | --- |

—

order, as a result, that Mr George Haswani’s name be removed from the annexes to the above-mentioned acts;

| — | order the Council to pay EUR 7 00  000 in damages to compensate all forms of loss suffered; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay EUR 7 00  000 in damages to compensate all forms of loss suffered;

| — | order the Council to pay its own costs and the costs of the applicant, which he reserves the right to justify during the course of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay its own costs and the costs of the applicant, which he reserves the right to justify during the course of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law: the Council violated the applicant’s right of defence, right to a hearing and right to a fair trial. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law: the Council violated the applicant’s right of defence, right to a hearing and right to a fair trial.

| 2. | Second plea in law: the Council failed to state reasons to the extent that the reasoning of the contested acts is insufficient and imprecise. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law: the Council failed to state reasons to the extent that the reasoning of the contested acts is insufficient and imprecise.

| 3. | Third plea in law: the Council committed a manifest error of assessment and failed to provide evidence to the extent that there are no genuine and reasonable grounds for the restrictive measures taken against the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law: the Council committed a manifest error of assessment and failed to provide evidence to the extent that there are no genuine and reasonable grounds for the restrictive measures taken against the applicant.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law: the Council infringed the general principle of proportionality. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law: the Council infringed the general principle of proportionality.

| 5. | Fifth plea in law: the Council should compensate the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law: the Council should compensate the applicant.

---