# C_2019103EN.01001702.xml

| 18.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/17

---

Appeal brought on 25 January 2019 by Council of the European Union against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 15 November 2018 in Case T-316/14: Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) v Council

(Case C-46/19 P)

(2019/C 103/18)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, S. Van Overmeire, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), European Commission, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the contested judgment of the General Court; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the contested judgment of the General Court;

| — | give final judgment in the matters that are the subject of this appeal and to dismiss PKK's application; and |
| --- | --- |

—

give final judgment in the matters that are the subject of this appeal and to dismiss PKK's application; and

| — | order the PKK to pay the costs of the Council arising from the present appeal and from Case T-316/14. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the PKK to pay the costs of the Council arising from the present appeal and from Case T-316/14.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Council submits that the General Court erred in the contested judgment on the following points:

| — | first plea: the General Court wrongly characterised the contested decisions as purely Article 1(6) decisions (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

first plea: the General Court wrongly characterised the contested decisions as purely Article 1(6) decisions (1);

| — | second plea: the General Court wrongly concluded that the U.S. decisions cannot serve as a basis for the initial listing; |
| --- | --- |

—

second plea: the General Court wrongly concluded that the U.S. decisions cannot serve as a basis for the initial listing;

| — | third plea: the General Court wrongly found that the Council had failed to explain why it considered the U.S. decisions and the Order of the UK Home Secretary to be a decision of a competent authority within the meaning of Article 1(4) of CP931; |
| --- | --- |

—

third plea: the General Court wrongly found that the Council had failed to explain why it considered the U.S. decisions and the Order of the UK Home Secretary to be a decision of a competent authority within the meaning of Article 1(4) of CP931;

| — | fourth plea: the General Court wrongly applied the Court of Justice's LTTE (2) judgment, point 55, to the case at hand; |
| --- | --- |

—

fourth plea: the General Court wrongly applied the Court of Justice's LTTE (2) judgment, point 55, to the case at hand;

| — | fifth plea: the General Court wrongly applied LTTE, point 71 to the case at hand; |
| --- | --- |

—

fifth plea: the General Court wrongly applied LTTE, point 71 to the case at hand;

| — | sixth plea: the General Court wrongly applied Article 1(4) of CP931 and point 55 of the LTTE judgment; |
| --- | --- |

—

sixth plea: the General Court wrongly applied Article 1(4) of CP931 and point 55 of the LTTE judgment;

| — | seventh plea: the General Court wrongly held that the Council could not respond to the PKK's letter in its own letter of 27 March 2015. |
| --- | --- |

—

seventh plea: the General Court wrongly held that the Council could not respond to the PKK's letter in its own letter of 27 March 2015.

---

(1)  Council Common Position of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism (OJ 2001, L 344, p. 93).

(2)  Case C-599/14 P, Council v. LTTE, EU:C2017:583

---