# C_2012217EN.01002403.xml

| 21.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/24

---

Action brought on 16 May 2012 — Alchaar v Council

(Case T-203/12)

2012/C 217/52

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mohamad Nedal Alchaar (Alep, Syria) (represented by: A. Korkmaz, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul, as far as those acts concern the applicant:






  — | Implementing Regulation No 1244/2011 of 1 December 2011; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

annul, as far as those acts concern the applicant:

—

Implementing Regulation No 1244/2011 of 1 December 2011;

| — | Decision No 2011/782/CFSP as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by implementing Decision No 2012/37/CFSP, Decision 2012/122/CFSP, Implementing Decision 2012/172/CFSP and Decision 2012/206/CFSP; |
| --- | --- |

—

Decision No 2011/782/CFSP as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by implementing Decision No 2012/37/CFSP, Decision 2012/122/CFSP, Implementing Decision 2012/172/CFSP and Decision 2012/206/CFSP;

| — | Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 of 18 January 2012 as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by Implementing Regulation No 55/2012, Regulation No 168/2012 and Implementing Regulation No 266/2012 |
| --- | --- |

—

Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 of 18 January 2012 as amended and supplemented up to now, in particular by Implementing Regulation No 55/2012, Regulation No 168/2012 and Implementing Regulation No 266/2012

| — | All future acts amending or supplementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation No 36/2012 |
| --- | --- |

—

All future acts amending or supplementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation No 36/2012

| — | annul the Council’s decision in its letter of 16 March 2012 addressed to the applicant, in so far as it maintains his inclusion on the contested lists; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Council’s decision in its letter of 16 March 2012 addressed to the applicant, in so far as it maintains his inclusion on the contested lists;

| — | 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 relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging an infringement of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees, in particular rights, the duty to state reasons and the principle of effective judicial protection, in so far as the applicant did not receive formal notification of his inclusion on the list of persons sanctioned and or the grounds for his inclusion in the contested acts and were not sufficient to justify the sanctions. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging an infringement of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees, in particular rights, the duty to state reasons and the principle of effective judicial protection, in so far as the applicant did not receive formal notification of his inclusion on the list of persons sanctioned and or the grounds for his inclusion in the contested acts and were not sufficient to justify the sanctions.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the right to property and economic freedom. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the right to property and economic freedom.

---