Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2025:702
Date: 2025-07-09
Language of the case: French
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for damages - unfounded;Action for annulment - inadmissible

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 July 2025 – Mhana v Council (Case T‑386/24) ( Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Syria – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on entry into the territories of the Member States – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on entry into the territory of the Member States – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the lists – ‘Family membership’ criterion – Article 27(2)(b) and Article 28(2)(b) of Decision 2013/255/CFSP – Rights of the defence – Error of assessment – Proportionality – Right to property – Non-contractual liability ) 1. EU law – Principles – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Restrictive measures – Obligation to disclose individual and specific grounds for the decisions adopted – Right to be heard prior to the adoption of such measures – Limitations – Conditions (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Arts 41(2)(a) and 52(1); Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510, Annex; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraphs 32-34) 2. 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 earlier decision – Infringement of the right to be heard –None (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41; Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraphs 35-39) 3. European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Syria – Scope of the review – Proof that the measure is well founded – Obligation on the competent EU authority to establish, in the event of challenge, that the reasons relied on against the persons or entities concerned are well founded (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraphs 47-53) 4. European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Syria – Scope of the review – Inclusion of the applicant on the list annexed to the contested decision on account of her membership of the Assad or Makhlouf families –Documents available to the public – Probative value (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraph 54) 5. European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Syria – Scope of the review – Proof that the measure is well founded – Obligation on the competent EU authority to establish, in the event of challenge, that the reasons relied on against the persons or entities concerned are well founded – Breadth of the discretion of that competent authority – Relevance of evidence produced on the basis of a previous inclusion where there are no amendments to the grounds for inclusion or changes in the applicant’s situation or in the context in Syria (Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraphs 55, 56, 70, 71) 6. Common foreign and security policy – Specific restrictive measures against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Syria – Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Regulation No 36/2012 – Assumption that influential businessmen and women engaged in activities in Syria and members of the Assad and Makhlouf families support the Syrian regime – Whether permissible – Conditions (Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2015/1836, Arts 27(1) and (2) and 28(1) and (2); Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2015/1828, Art. 15(1)(a) and (1a)) (see paragraphs 60-66) 7. Common foreign and security policy – Specific restrictive measures against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Syria – Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Regulation No 36/2012 – Assumption that members of the Assad and Makhlouf families support the Syrian regime – Whether permissible – Conditions – Rebuttable presumption – Evidence to the contrary –None (Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2015/1836, Arts 27(3) and 28(3); Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2015/1828, Art. 15(1b)) (see paragraphs 73-99) 8. Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Syria – Freezing of funds of persons, entities or bodies associated with the Syrian regime – Restriction of the right to property – Whether permissible – Conditions – Restriction laid down by law – Respect for the essence of the right invoked – Pursuit of an objective of general interest recognised as such by the European Union – Observance of the principle of proportionality – Conditions met (Art. 21(2) TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Arts 17 and 52(1); Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/1510; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and 2024/1517) (see paragraphs 104-132) 9. Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Unlawfulness – Damage – Causal link – Cumulative conditions (Art. 340, second para., TFEU) (see paragraphs 136-141) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Ms Ghada Mhana to pay the costs.