Case T-314/26: Action brought on 25 May 2026 – Gagarina v Council
Date: 2026-05-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russo-Ukrainian issue, economic sanctions, freedom of expression, fundamental rights, international sanctions, natural person, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to an effective remedy








C_202603433EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/3433


6.7.2026






Action brought on 25 May 2026 – Gagarina v Council


(Case T-314/26)

(C/2026/3433)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Polina Sergeevna Gagarina (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: D. Rovetta, M. Campa and V. Villante, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2026/696 of 14 March 2026 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine as published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 14 March 2026;










—


Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/695 of 14 March 2026, implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, as published in the Official Journal of the European Union 14 March 2026,
collectively referred to as the ‘Contested Acts’, in so far as the Contested Acts include the applicant in the list of persons and entities made subject to the restrictive measures;










—


Order the Council to bear the costs of the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons, of Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of Article 41 (2) (C) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Breach of the Right to Effective Judicial Protection and of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment by the Council, failure to discharge the burden of proof – Breach of the listing criteria set forth in Article 1 (1) (a) and 2 (1) (a) of Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 march 2014 and in Article 3 (1) (a) of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 march 2014, both concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Breach of the principle of legal certainty.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality and the applicant’s fundamental rights.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of the freedom of expression principle set forth in Article 11 of The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as well as breach of freedom of arts principle set forth in Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights – Plea of illegality under Article 277 TFEU of the listing criterion set forth in Article 1 (1) (a) and 2 (1) (a) of Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 and in Article 3 (1) (a) of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging breach of the essential procedural requirements in adopting the Contested Acts insofar as they concern the applicant – Violation of Article 14(3) of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Breach of Article 19(2) third sentence of the Rules of Procedure of the Council in the context of Restrictive Measures – Breach of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/3433/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)