Case T‑153/15

Mohamad Hamcho

and

Hamcho International

v

Council of the European Union

‛Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of funds — Annulment of previous acts by judgment of the General Court — New acts including the applicants’ names in the lists — Action for annulment — Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure — Content of the application — Admissibility — Obligation to state reasons — Burden of proof — Right to property — Freedom to conduct a business’

Summary — Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber), 26 October 2016

Judicial proceedings — Treatment of cases before the General Court — Protection given to parties against misuse of pleadings and other procedural documents — Scope (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 89)

Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — General reference to documents annexed to the application — Admissibility — Conditions (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(1)(d))

Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of funds of persons, entities or bodies having regard to the situation in Syria — Decision falling within a context known to the person concerned, enabling him to understand the scope of the measure taken against him — Whether summary statement of reasons sufficient (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Decisions 2013/255/CFSP and 2015/117/CFSP; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and No 2015/108)

Actions for annulment — Grounds — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Obligation to state reasons — Separate ground from the one concerning substantive legality (Arts 263 TFEU and 296 TFEU)

European Union — Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions — Restrictive measures against Syria — Ambit of the review — Proof the measure well-founded — Obligation on the competent EU authority to establish, in the event of challenge, that the grounds held against the persons or entities concerned well-founded (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Decisions 2013/255/CFSP and 2015/117/CFSP; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and No 2015/108)

Judicial proceedings — Burden of proof — Documentary evidence — Probative value — Assessment by the EU judicature — Criteria (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 85)

Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of funds and economic resources — Annulment action by a person benefiting from the policies of the Syrian regime covered by a fund-freezing decision — Burden of proof — Decision based on a series of indicators — Lawfulness — Conditions (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Decisions 2013/255/CFSP and 2015/117/CFSP; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and No 2015/108)

EU law — Principles — Rights of defence — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of the funds of persons, entities or bodies responsible for violent repression against the civil population in Syria — Obligation to communicate the incriminating evidence at the same time as the adoption of the measure affecting those parties, or immediately thereafter (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(2); Council Decisions 2013/255/CFSP and 2015/117/CFSP; Council Regulations No 36/2012 and No 2015/108)