Case C-147/25, Inter Rao Lietuva: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 17 February 2025 – Inter Rao Lietuva AB v Finansinių nusikaltimų tyrimų tarnyba prie Vidaus reikalų ministerijos
Date: 2025-02-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, abuse of power, economic sanctions, freezing of assets, international sanctions, right to an effective remedy








C_202502646EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2646


19.5.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 17 February 2025 – Inter Rao Lietuva AB v Finansinių nusikaltimų tyrimų tarnyba prie Vidaus reikalų ministerijos


(Case C-147/25, Inter Rao Lietuva)

(C/2025/2646)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Inter Rao Lietuva AB

Respondent: Finansinių nusikaltimų tyrimų tarnyba prie Vidaus reikalų ministerijos

Other parties: Lietuvos Respublikos užsienio reikalų ministerija, Tarptautinių sankcijų koordinavimo komisija, Įmonių bankroto administravimo ir teisinių paslaugų biuras UAB

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 2 of Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1) and Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, (2) read in conjunction with the principle of good administration enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter, permit a national measure under which a person who is not listed in Annex I to Decision 2014/145/CFSP or in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 is included on the list of persons whose assets are frozen on account of that person’s links with persons subject to sanctions, and the possibility of objecting to such a national measure before the competent authority is provided for only after such inclusion?










2.


Under the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter, is the requirement of effective judicial review satisfied by a review by a national court of the lawfulness of a decision to freeze a person’s assets in the context of the implementation of EU restrictive measures, involving an examination of whether procedural rules have been observed or whether the obligation to state reasons has been fulfilled, an examination of the accuracy of the facts, of whether there are any manifest errors in the assessment of those facts and of whether no misuse of powers has taken place?










3.


Do the provisions of Article 2 of Decision 2014/145/CFSP and Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, read in conjunction with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter, require, when proving a person’s links with representatives of the political authorities of the Russian Federation before a national court, an assessment of the circumstances relating to the reality and effectiveness of the control exercised by the political authorities of the Russian Federation over legal persons operating in that country, which it may not be possible to prove by objective and sufficiently serious indicia adduced in the case, and which may recognise relevant representatives of the political authorities of the Russian Federation as exercising control over the person on the basis of the governmental powers they hold?






(1)  Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 78, p. 16).

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 78, p. 6).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2646/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)