Case C-779/24 P: Appeal brought on 12 November 2024 by Samer Kamal Al-Assad against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 4 September 2024 in Case T-370/23, Al-Assad v Council
Date: 2024-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Syria, economic sanctions, family, international sanctions, natural person, protection of privacy, right to an effective remedy, right to property








C_202500389EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/389


27.1.2025






Appeal brought on 12 November 2024 by Samer Kamal Al-Assad against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 4 September 2024 in Case T-370/23, Al-Assad v Council


(Case C-779/24 P)

(C/2025/389)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Samer Kamal Al-Assad (represented by: W. Woll, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 4 September 2024, Al-Assad v Council (T-370/23, ECLI:EU:T:2024:588);










—


set aside Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/844 (1) in so far as it includes his name in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012;










—


set aside Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2023/847 (2) adding the appellant’s name to Annex I to Decision 2013/255/CFSP;










—


order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs incurred at first instance and on appeal.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments

In support of his appeal, the appellant puts forward six grounds of appeal.






1.


The General Court erred in law in dismissing the plea of illegality raised against the family membership criterion set out in Article 27(2)(b) and Article 28(2)(b) of Decision 2013/255/CFSP claiming that that criterion is contrary to Articles 7, 17, 21 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










2.


The General Court erred in law in dismissing the complaint alleging that the Council had made an error of assessment in breach of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










3.


The General Court erred in law in dismissing the complaint alleging breach of the right to property protected by Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










4.


The General Court erred in law in dismissing the complaint alleging breach of the right to be heard by a criminal court (jus puniendi) set out in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










5.


The General Court erred in law in failing to rule on the complaint alleging that the appellant’s reputation had been harmed.










6.


In giving judgment on the basis of presumptions and requiring the appellant to prove a negative, the General Court did not afford him effective judicial protection in breach of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.






(1)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/844 of 24 April 2023 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2023 L 109I, p. 1).

(2)  Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2023/847 of 24 April 2023 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2023 L 109I, p. 26).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/389/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)