Case C-39/25 P: Appeal brought on 22 January 2025 by Bogoljub Karić against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 6 November 2024 in Case T-520/22, Karić v Council
Date: 2025-01-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belarus, EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, case-law (EU), economic sanctions, international sanctions, judicial review, natural person








C_202501225EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1225


3.3.2025






Appeal brought on 22 January 2025 by Bogoljub Karić against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 6 November 2024 in Case T-520/22, Karić v Council


(Case C-39/25 P)

(C/2025/1225)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Bogoljub Karić (represented by: W. Julié, A. Beauchemin, T. Marembert and A. Bass, avocats)

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 under appeal;










—


dispose on the merits and annul the following acts, insofar as they concern Mr. Bogoljub Karić: Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2022/881 (1) of 3 June 2022 implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine; Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/876 (2) of 3 June 2022 implementing Article 8a (1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006; Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/421 (3) of 24 February 2023 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP; Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/419 (4) of 24 February 2023 implementing Article 8a of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006;










—


alternatively, set aside the judgment and remit the case to the General Court;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the Appellant relies on six pleas in law.
The first plea in law alleges that the General Court committed an error in law in the interpretation and application of Article 3(1)(b) and Article 4(1)(b) of Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP (5), and of Article 2(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 (6).
The second plea in law alleges that the General Court committed an error of law in failing to distinguish between the alleged ‘benefit and support’ as required by Article 3(1)(b) and Article 4(1)(b) of Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, and of Article 2(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006.
The third plea in law alleges that the General Court distorted several items of evidence.
The fourth plea in law alleges that the General Court disregarded the scope of its judicial review and infringed Article 263 TFEU, essential procedural requirements and the duty to state reasons laid down in Article 296 TFEU and Article 36 of the Statute of the Court of Justice through insufficient and contradictory reasoning.
The fifth plea in law alleges an error in law in the failure to take into consideration case law related to the passage of time.
The sixth plea in law alleges a violation of Article 3(1)(b) and Article 4(1)(b) of Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP, and of Article 2(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 as well as an infringement of essential procedural requirements and of the duty to state reasons under article 296 TFEU and article 36 of the Statute of the Court of Justice by failing to state adequate reasons; and a disregard by the General Court of the scope of its judicial review and infringement of Article 263 TFEU.


(1)  
            OJ 2022, L 153, p. 77.

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/876 of 3 June 2022 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine (OJ 2022, L 153, p. 1).

(3)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/421 of 24 February 2023 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine (OJ 2023, L 61, p. 41).

(4)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/419 of 24 February 2023 implementing Article 8a of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine (OJ 2023, L 61, p. 20).

(5)  Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2012, L 285, p. 1).

(6)  Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 of 18 May 2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus (OJ 2006, L 134, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1225/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)