CELEX: 62011TN0656
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-656/11: Action brought on 29 December 2011 — Morison Menon Chartered Accountants and Others v Council

25.2.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 58/14
            
         Action brought on 29 December 2011 — Morison Menon Chartered Accountants and Others v Council
   (Case T-656/11)
   2012/C 58/26
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: Morison Menon Chartered Accountants (Dubai, United Arab Emirates); Morison Menon Chartered Accountants — Dubai Office (Dubai); and Morison Menon Chartered Accountants — Sharjah Office (Sharjah, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: H. Viaene, T. Ruys and D. Gillet, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul Council implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (1) and Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (2) insofar as they concern the applicants;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Council to pay the costs incurred by the applicants, as well as its own.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of their action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           an infringement of the duty to state reasons on the part of the Council, as well as the applicants’ rights of defence, in particular the right to be heard and to an effective judicial remedy;
                        
                     
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           a manifest error of assessment on the part of the Council;
                        
                     
         
               3.
            
            
               Third plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           an infringement of the right to property.
                        
                     
         
      (1)  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 11
   
   
      (2)  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 71