CELEX: 62018TN0260
Language: en
Date: 2018-04-25 00:00:00
Title: Case T-260/18: Action brought on 25 April 2018 — Makhlouf v Commission and ECB

201806220581970172018/C 240/572602018TC24020180709EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180425495021Case T-260/18: Action brought on 25 April 2018 — Makhlouf v Commission and ECB
 ---documentbreak--- C2402018EN4910120180425EN0057491502Action brought on 25 April 2018 — Makhlouf v Commission and ECB
   (Case T-260/18)2018/C 240/57Language of the case: French
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Rami Makhlouf (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)
   
      Defendants: European Commission and European Central Bank
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the General Court should
   
            —
         
         
            declare the applicant’s action admissible and well founded;
         
      
            —
         
         
            consequently, order the European Union, the defendants, to pay compensation to the applicant in respect of all of the harm suffered, in the sum of EUR 6900000, plus interest;
         
      
            —
         
         
            order the defendants to pay all of the costs of the action.
         
      
      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 infringement, on the part of the Commission, of Article 17(1) TEU and of Article 13(3) and (4) of the ESM Treaty in so far as it failed to ensure that the memorandum of understanding of 26 April 2013 was compatible with EU law;
         
      
            2.
         
         
            Second plea in law, alleging misuse of powers and infringement of Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, on the part of the ECB, in so far as it used its powers in matters of monetary policy in order to impose the terms of bank restructuring on the Eurogroup and the Government of Cyprus.
         
      
            3.
         
         
            Third plea in law, alleging expropriation of the applicant’s assets without fair compensation.