do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-643/16: Action brought on 11 September 2016 — Gamaa Islamya Egypte v Council
Date: 2016-09-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, right to justice, rights of the defence, terrorism








C_2016419EN.01005001.xml










14.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/50





Action brought on 11 September 2016 — Gamaa Islamya Egypte v Council
(Case T-643/16)
(2016/C 419/66)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Gamaa Islamya Egypte (Egypt) (represented by: L. Glock, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1136 of 12 July 2016 updating the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2015/2430 (OJ L 188, 13.7.2016, p. 21), in so far as it concerns Gamaa Islamya Egypte;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1127 of 12 July 2016 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2425 (OJ L 188, 13.7.2016, p. 1) in so far as it concerns Gamaa Islamya Egypte;










—


order the Council to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four plea(s) in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 1(5) of Council Common Position of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism (2001/931/CFSP; OJ 2001, L 344, p. 93; ‘Common Position 2001/931’).










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 1(4) of Common Position 2001/931.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Council committed errors as to the accuracy of the allegations made against the applicant.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Council committed an error of assessment as to whether the applicant is a ‘terrorist group’.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 1(6) of Common Position 2001/931.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty to state reasons










7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging infringement of the rights of the defence and of the right to effective judicial protection.










8.


Eighth plea in law, alleging a failure to authenticate the statement of reasons.