Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2020:783
Date: 2020-10-01
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: External relations;Common foreign and security policy
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 October 2020 – Almashreq Investment Fund v Council (Case C‑349/19 P) (1) (Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against the Syrian Arab Republic – Measures directed against certain persons and entities operating in Syria – List of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the appellant’s name – Action for annulment) 1. Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Syria – Freezing of funds of persons, entities or bodies associated with the Syrian regime – Rights of the defence – Notification of inculpatory evidence – Subsequent decision maintaining the name of the applicant on the list of persons covered by those measures – No new grounds – Inculpatory evidence identical to the evidence previously admitted in the initial decision – Infringement of the right to be heard – Absence (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41; Council Decisions (CFSP) 2016/850, (CFSP) 2017/917 and (CFSP) 2018/778) (see paras 44-48) 2. Appeal – Grounds – Incorrect assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 65-67) 3. Common foreign and security policy – Specific restrictive measures against certain persons and bodies in view of the situation in Syria – Decision 2013/255/CFSP – Assumption that influential businessmen and women engaged in activities in Syria and members of the Assad and Makhlouf families support the Syrian regime – Entity placed under the control of a member of the Assad and Makhlouf families – Inclusion of the entity at issue in order to avoid the restrictive measures adopted being circumvented – Whether permissible (Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2015/1836, Arts 27(2)(a) and (b) and 28(2)(a) and (b)) (see paras 78-83, 92) 4. Appeal – Grounds – Plea raised for the first time in the context of the appeal – Inadmissibility (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170(1)) (see paras 85, 86) 5. Appeal – Grounds – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissibility (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 168(1) and 169) (see para. 88) 6. Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Syria – Freezing of the funds of persons, entities or organisations associated with the Syrian regime – Breach of principle of proportionality – Absence (Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2015/1836) (see paras 89, 90) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders Almashreq Investment Fund to pay the costs. 1 OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.