CELEX: 62018TN0338
Language: en
Date: 2018-05-31 00:00:00
Title: Case T-338/18: Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Saleh Thabet v Coucil

201807060631994542018/C 259/663382018TC25920180723EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180531495021Case T-338/18: Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Saleh Thabet v Coucil
 ---documentbreak--- C2592018EN4910120180531EN0066491502Action brought on 31 May 2018 — Saleh Thabet v Coucil
   (Case T-338/18)2018/C 259/66Language of the case: English
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Suzanne Saleh Thabet (Cairo, Egypt) (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 applicant claims 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 applicant;
         
      
            —
         
         
            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 applicant; and
            order the Council to bear the costs of the proceedings.
         
      
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies 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 applicant 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 applicant’s 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