CELEX: 62018TN0335
Language: en
Date: 2018-05-31 00:00:00
Title: Case T-335/18: Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Mubarak and Others/Council

201807060491993942018/C 259/653352018TC25920180723EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180531484922Case T-335/18: Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Mubarak and Others/Council
 ---documentbreak--- C2592018EN4820120180531EN0065482492Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Mubarak and Others/Council
   (Case T-335/18)2018/C 259/65Language of the case: English
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: Gamal Mohamed Hosni Elsayed Mubarak (Cairo, Egypt), Alaa Mohamed Hosni Elsayed Mubarak (Cairo), Heidy Mahmoud Magdy Hussein Rasekh (Cairo), Khadiga Mahmoud El Gammal (Cairo) (represented by B. Kennelly QC, J. Pobjoy, Barrister, G. Martin and C. Enderby Smith, Solicitors)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicants claim that the Court should:
   
            —
         
         
            annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/466 of 21 March 2018 amending Decision 2011/172/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt and annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/465 of 21 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt insofar as they apply to the applicants;
         
      
            —
         
         
            declare that Article 1(1) of Council Decision 2011/172/CFSP of 21 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt and Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 of 21 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt are inapplicable, insofar as they apply to the applicants; and
         
      
            —
         
         
            order the Council to pay the applicants’ costs.
         
      
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.
   
            1.
         
         
            First plea in law, alleging that the Council has made errors of assessment in considering that the criterion for listing the applicants in Article 1(1) of the Decision and Article 2(1) of the Regulation was satisfied.
         
      
            2.
         
         
            Second plea in law, alleging that Article 1(1) of the Decision and Article 2(1) of the Regulation are illegal because (a) they lack a valid legal basis and/or (b) they breach the principle of proportionality.
         
      
            3.
         
         
            Third plea in law, alleging the violation of the applicants’ rights under Article 6, read with Articles 2 and 3, TEU and Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union by the Council’s assumption that the judicial proceedings in Egypt complied with fundamental human rights.