CELEX: 62012TN0446
Language: en
Date: 2012-10-09 00:00:00
Title: Case T-446/12: Action brought on 9 October 2012 — Drex Technologies v Council

1.12.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 373/12
            
         Action brought on 9 October 2012 — Drex Technologies v Council
   (Case T-446/12)
   2012/C 373/21
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Drex Technologies SA (Tortola, British Virgin Isles) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Declare the applicant’s action admissible and well founded;
            
         
               —
            
            
               In consequence, annul
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           Council Implementing Decision 2012/424/CFSP of 23 July 2012 implementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria and the corrigendum thereto of 9 August 2012, in so far as those measures affect the applicant;
                        
                     
                           —
                        
                        
                           and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 673/2012 of 23 July 2012 implementing Article 32(1) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria and the corrigendum thereto of 9 August 2012, in so far as those measures affect the applicant;
                        
                     
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law, which are in essence identical or similar to those put forward in Case T-432/11 Makhlouf v Council. (1)
   
   
      (1)  JO 2011 C 290, p. 13.