do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-275/23: Action brought on 18 May 2023 — Tinkoff Bank v Council
Date: 2023-05-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Ukraine, bank, economic sanctions, equal treatment, international sanctions, legal person, ownership, principle of proportionality








C_2023252EN.01006502.xml










17.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/65






Action brought on 18 May 2023 — Tinkoff Bank v Council
(Case T-275/23)
(2023/C 252/78)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Tinkoff Bank SA (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: A. Genko, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


find its application for annulment to be admissible and well-founded and therefore:










—


annul Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 as amended on 25 February 2023 by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/429 (OJ L 59 I/ 278) in so far as it adds the applicant to the list of sanctioned entities under number 200;










—


annul Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 as amended on 25 February 2023 by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/432 (OJ L 59 I/ 437) in so far as it adds the applicant to the list of sanctioned entities under number 200;










—


annul Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 as amended on 25 February 2022 by Regulation (EU) 2022/330 (OJ 51/ 1) by the addition of a new criterion making it possible to sanction ‘leading businesspersons or legal persons, entities or bodies involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation …’ in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


annul Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022 (OJ L 50/1) by the addition of a new criterion making it possible to sanction ‘leading businesspersons involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation …’ in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


annul the maintaining acts in so far as they concern the applicant;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-270/23, Rosbank v Council.