62019CJ0348_INF
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 October 2020 – Drex Technologies v Council
(Case C‑348/19 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 43-47)
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 64-66)
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 77-82, 91)
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 84, 85)
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, Art. 168(1)(d) and 169)
(see para. 87)
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 88, 89)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the appeal;
2.
Orders Drex Technologies SA to pay the costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.