Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 September 2025 – Karić v Council
(Case T‑238/24)
( Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources or to restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Obligation to state reasons – Error of assessment )
1.      Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Freezing of funds of certain persons and entities having regard to the situation in Belarus – Decision falling within a context known to the person concerned, enabling him or her to understand the scope of the measure taken against him or her – Whether summary statement of reasons sufficient – Infringement – None
(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/769, Annex; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Annex I, and 2024/768)
(see paragraphs 31-34, 36-42, 48, 52-56)
2.      Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Criteria for adopting restrictive measures – Natural or legal persons, entities or bodies benefiting from or supporting the Lukashenko regime – Concepts – Situations in which the person concerned meets multiple criteria simultaneously
(Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, Arts 3(1)(b) and 4(1)(b); Council Regulation No 765/2006, Art. 2(5))
(see paragraphs 45, 46)
3.      Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Criteria for adopting restrictive measures – Natural or legal persons, entities or bodies benefiting from or supporting the Lukashenko regime – Concept of association – Common interests
(Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, Arts 3(1)(b) and 4(1)(b); Council Regulation No 765/2006, Art. 2(5))
(see paragraph 49)
4.      European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Freezing of funds of certain persons and entities having regard to the situation in Belarus – 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 – Inclusion on the lists based on a specific, precise and consistent body of evidence
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/769, Annex; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Annex I, and 2024/768)
(see paragraphs 69-72, 105, 108, 112, 116, 130-137, 146, 149-153)
5.      European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Scope of the review – Natural or legal persons, entities or bodies benefiting from or supporting the Lukashenko regime – Publicly available documents showing support for the Belarusian regime – Probative value – Principle of the unfettered evaluation of evidence
(Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/769, Annex; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Annex I, and 2024/768)
(see paragraph 73)
6.      European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Freezing of funds of certain persons and entities having regard to the situation in Belarus – 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 the evidence produced in connection with an earlier listing in the absence of any amendment to the grounds for listing, changes to the applicant’s situation or changes to the context of Belarus
(Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, as amended by Decisions (CFSP) 2022/881, (CFSP) 2023/421 and (CFSP) 2024/769, Annex; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Annex I, 2022/876, 2023/419 and 2024/768)
(see paragraphs 75, 92, 93, 96, 97)
7.      Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against Belarus – Criteria for adopting restrictive measures – Natural or legal persons, entities or bodies benefiting from or supporting the Lukashenko regime – Concept – Error of assessment – None
(Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2024/769, Arts 3(1)(b) and 4(1)(b), and Annex; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Art. 2(5), and Annex I, and 2024/768)
(see paragraphs 154, 158-165)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Mr Bogoljub Karić to pay the costs.