In the context of restrictive measures against Iran, such as the freezing of funds of entities supporting the Iranian Government and entities associated with them, which is required of the Council by Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012 concerning the adoption of restrictive measures against Iran, the statement of reasons for measures listing certain entities as being amongst those supporting the nuclear and ballistic missile programme and those supporting the Iranian Government enables the latter to identify the criterion laid down by Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 and Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012, namely the listing criterion concerning entities held by an entity supporting the Iranian Government, which served as the legal basis for their listing, where, first, the use of the word ‘subsidiary’ in that statement or reasons necessarily refers to the existence of control by a parent company which may result, in particular, from the existence of shareholding links between the latter and the subsidiary in question, and, second, the context in which the contested acts were adopted made it possible to identify the parent company which owned or controlled them, whose inclusion on the lists was based on the criterion for inclusion applicable to entities providing support to the Iranian Government.

When the funds of an entity identified as providing support to the Iranian Government are frozen, there is a not insignificant danger that that entity may exert pressure on the entities it owns or controls or which belong to it, in order to circumvent the effect of the measures applying to it. Consequently, the freezing of the funds of such entities, as imposed by the Council by Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 and Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012, is necessary and appropriate in order to ensure the effectiveness of the measures adopted and to ensure that those measures are not circumvented.

Accordingly, when adopting a decision under the provisions referred to above, the Council must carry out an assessment of the circumstances of the individual case in order to determine which entities may be classified as entities owned or controlled. On the other hand, the nature of the activity of the entity concerned and the fact that there may be no connection between that activity and the provision of support to the Iranian Government are not relevant criteria in that context, as the grounds for the adoption of a measure freezing the funds of an entity that is owned or controlled do not have to include the fact that the entity itself directly provides support to that government.

Where the capital of an entity is entirely owned by an entity providing support to the Iranian Government, the criterion for inclusion laid down in Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 and in Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012 is satisfied.

Where the capital of an entity is indirectly held by an entity providing support to the Iranian Government, the criterion for inclusion laid down in Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 and in Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012 is satisfied, irrespective of the presence and number of intermediary companies between that parent entity and the entity that is owned by it, provided that each of the entities present in the holding chain is entirely owned by its respective direct parent company. In such circumstances, the parent entity retains sole and exclusive control over all its subsidiaries and is therefore in a position, via intermediary companies, to exert pressure on the entity which it owns indirectly in order to circumvent the effect of the measures applying to it, therefore justifying the adoption of restrictive measures in respect of the entity that is thus indirectly owned.

Where virtually all the capital of an entity is owned by an entity providing support to the Iranian Government, the criterion for inclusion laid down in Article 20(1)(c) of Decision 2010/413 and in Article 23(2)(d) of Regulation No 267/2012 is satisfied, since a parent company is able to exercise decisive influence over the conduct of its subsidiary where it owns all, or virtually all, of its capital. However, a holding of 48% or 49% of an entity’s share capital by an entity providing support to the Iranian Government is not sufficient by itself, to justify the adoption of restrictive measures in respect of those entities.

(see paras 62-64, 68, 69, 72, 73, 81)