Case T-430/24: Action brought on 16 August 2024 – Schefler v Council
Date: 2024-08-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russo-Ukrainian issue, economic sanctions, equal treatment, international sanctions, nationality, ownership, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, refugee








C_202405838EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5838


7.10.2024






Action brought on 16 August 2024 – Schefler v Council


(Case T-430/24)

(C/2024/5838)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Yuri Schefler (Crans Montana, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Grand d’Esnon and P. Blanchetier, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


primarily, annul Article 1(6)(a) of Council Regulation (EU) 2024/1745 of 24 June 2024 amending Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine, (1) in so far as it amended Article 3d of Regulation No 833/2014; (2)











—


in the alternative, interpret Article 1(6)(a) of Council Regulation (EU) 2024/1745 in such a way that it does not apply to the applicant’s situation, as a result of his status as a refugee who has moreover renounced Russian citizenship;










—


in any event, order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs pursuant to Article 140(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons, as laid down in the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU and Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (3)







—


The applicant submits that, in the present case, the contested measures do not show clearly and unambiguously the reasoning of the institution that is the author of the measure, which does not enable him to ascertain the justifications for the measure taken and prevents the competent court from carrying out its review.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of legal certainty.






—


The applicant submits that the imprecise nature of the terms contained in the provisions at issue infringes the principle of legal certainty as defined by settled case-law.














3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the primacy of international law.






—


The applicant submits that the provisions at issue, which prohibit a Russian political refugee from using his or her aircraft or any aircraft with an economic or financial link with that person, or from chartering private flights, infringe Articles 3 and 8 of the United Nations' Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951 and therefore undermine the primacy of international law.














4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality.






—


The applicant asserts that the provisions at issue, which prohibit him from using an aircraft with which he has an economic or financial link and from chartering a private flight, even though he is a Russian political refugee who has, moreover, twice applied to renounce Russian citizenship and who is not subject to individual restrictive measures, are disproportionate and completely unnecessary in the light of the objectives pursued.














5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of the rule of law contained in Articles 2 and 3 TEU.






—


The applicant submits that the provisions at issue are incompatible with the values of the rule of law since they apply to a Russian political refugee.














6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of non-discrimination.






—


The applicant submits that the provisions at issue infringe the principle of non-discrimination.














7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to property and the freedom to come and go.






—


The applicant submits that the provisions at issue infringe the right to property and his freedom to come and go.










(1)  OJ L 2024/1745.

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 1).

(3)  
            OJ 2016 C 202, p. 389.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5838/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)