CELEX: 62016TN0408
Language: en
Date: 2016-07-27 00:00:00
Title: Case T-408/16: Action brought on 27 July 2016 — HX v Council

14.11.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 419/46
            
         Action brought on 27 July 2016 — HX v Council
   (Case T-408/16)
   (2016/C 419/62)
   Language of the case: Bulgarian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: HX (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: S. Koev, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               hold the present action to be admissible and well founded, and hold all the pleas it contains to be well founded;
            
         
               —
            
            
               examine the present action under the accelerated procedure;
            
         
               —
            
            
               declare that the contested acts may be annulled in part since the part of the acts which should be annulled can be separated from the act as a whole, and accordingly annul the following:
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria, in so far as it concerns the applicant, and
                        
                     
                           —
                        
                        
                           Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/840 of 27 May 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, in so far as it concerns the applicant;
                        
                     
         
               —
            
            
               order the Council to pay the entirety of the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging a manifest infringement of the right not to be tried or punished twice for the same criminal offence (Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging a manifest infringement of the rights of the defence and the right to a fair trial.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to effective judicial protection.
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Fifth plea in law, alleging an error of assessment on the part of the Council.
            
         
               6.
            
            
               Sixth plea in law, alleging an infringement of the right to property, of the principle of proportionality and of the freedom to conduct a business.
            
         
               7.
            
            
               Seventh plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to a normal life.
            
         
               8.
            
            
               Eighth plea in law, alleging a serious infringement of the right to the protection of reputation.