Case T-359/22: Action brought on 16 June 2022 — Zubitskiy v Council
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Ukraine, economic sanctions, fundamental rights, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, principle of proportionality, territorial dispute, territorial law








C_2022294EN.01004301.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/43






Action brought on 16 June 2022 — Zubitskiy v Council
(Case T-359/22)
(2022/C 294/60)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Evgeny Borisovich Zubitskiy (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: P. Zeller and D. Reingewirtz, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare Article 1(2) of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022 (1) in that it adds criteria (f) and (g) of Article 2(1) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP unlawful and inapplicable to Mr Evgeny Borisovich Zubitskiy;










—


annul Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022 (2) in so far as it concerns Mr Evgeny Borisovich Zubitskiy (Annex I of Regulation (EU) 269/2014 amended — No 913);










—


order the Council to pay all of the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging unlawfulness of Article 2(1) of Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022 and the consequent lack of a legal basis as regards adding criteria (f) and (g) to Decision (CFSP) 2014/145 of 17 March 2014, as amended.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty to state reasons for Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, in so far as it concerns the applicant and the infringement of Article 296 TFEU as a result.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an error of law and the infringement of Article 215 TFEU, in that the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, in so far as it concerns the applicant, is not necessary for the implementation of the decisions taken under Article 29 TEU and in particular Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in that the elements constituting criteria (f) and (g) of Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022, which is the basis for the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, in so far as it concerns the applicant, are not met.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging material inaccuracy in the facts, in that the alleged evidence relied upon by the Council in adopting Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, in so far as it concerns the applicant (i) is based solely on information, sometimes more than 5 years old, taken from online sites (some of which, in particular rucompromat, are not objective) and (ii) some of which are factually inaccurate.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s fundamental rights in that Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, in so far as it concerns the applicant, is an unjustified and disproportionate restriction on his fundamental rights including the right to property, enshrined in Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and freedom to conduct a business enshrined in Article 16 of that Charter.






(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022, amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 50, p. 1).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022, implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 110, p. 3).