CJEU Case C-384/24 / Judgment

Russisch-Kirgizisch Ontwikkelingsfonds v Belgische Staat
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Typ
Decision
Decision date
11/09/2025
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2025:696
  • CJEU Case C-384/24 / Judgment

    Key facts of the case:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common foreign and security policy – Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine – Article 2 – Freezing of funds and economic resources – Derogations – Article 4(1)(a), (b) and (d) – Release of certain frozen funds for specific expenses – Payment of a roll fee and a flat-rate contribution for the purpose of instituting an action for annulment against a decision implementing that regulation – Included

    Outcome of the case:

    On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby rules:

    Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1985 of 20 October 2022, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    must be interpreted as meaning that it includes the release or making available of certain frozen funds or economic resources for the purposes of paying a roll fee and a flat-rate contribution which must be paid, pursuant to the national law, upon lodging a court action against a national measure implementing that regulation.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    32. Consequently, it must be considered that, by its questions, which it is appropriate to examine together, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 4(1)(a), (b) and (d) of Regulation No 269/2014, read in combination with Article 2 of that regulation, Article 47 of the Charter and the first paragraph of Article 57 TFEU, must be interpreted as meaning that it includes the release or making available of certain frozen funds or economic resources for the purposes of paying a roll fee and a flat-rate contribution which must be paid, pursuant to the national law, upon lodging an action before a court against a national measure implementing that regulation.

    ...

    37. In the present case, it should be observed that the provisions of Article 4(1) of Regulation No 269/2014 must be interpreted in the light of recital 6 thereof, which states, inter alia, that that regulation should be applied in accordance with the fundamental rights and principles recognised by the Charter, and in particular the rights to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.

    38. In that regard, the Court has already held, in the comparable context of Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 of 18 May 2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2006 L 134, p. 1), as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 84/2011 of 31 January 2011 (OJ 2011 L 28, p. 17) and Council Regulation (EU) No 588/2011 of 20 June 2011 (OJ 2011 L 161, p. 1), that when deciding on a request for release of frozen funds pursuant to Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation No 765/2006, the competent national authority implements EU law. It follows that that authority is required to observe the Charter, as provided for in Article 51(1) thereof (judgment of 12 June 2014, Peftiev and Others, C‑314/13, EU:C:2014:1645, paragraph 24).

    39. From that perspective, it must be noted that the reason for the release of frozen funds or economic resources provided for in Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation No 269/2014 is intended, whichever language version of that provision is referred to, to facilitate the access, by persons and entities whose assets are frozen, to legal services in order to ensure the defence of their interests. That provision must therefore be interpreted in keeping with the requirements deriving from Article 47 of the Charter to the effect that a freeze of those assets cannot have the effect of depriving the persons whose assets have been frozen of effective access to justice (see, to that effect, judgment of 12 June 2014, Peftiev and Others, C‑314/13, EU:C:2014:1645, paragraphs 25 and 26).

    40. More specifically, it may be recalled that, according to the second sentence of the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter, everyone is to have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented.

    41. Accordingly, Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation No 269/2014 must be interpreted in the light of that provision of the Charter as meaning that, by referring, as a whole, to ‘payment of reasonable professional fees or reimbursement of incurred expenses associated with the provision of legal services’, it is capable of including all of the expenses incurred to permit a person, entity or body whose assets are frozen to obtain legal representation.

    ...

    49. Secondly, as regards the phrase ‘necessary to satisfy the basic needs’ in Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 269/2014, it must be held that, as is clear from recital 6 of that regulation, that phrase must be interpreted as meaning that it covers, inter alia, the expenses necessary to ensure respect of the fundamental rights of those persons, entities or bodies, including the rights to an effective remedy and a fair trial, protected by Article 47 of the Charter.

    ...

    51. That interpretation is not called into question by the fact that, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter, legal aid is to be made available to those who lack sufficient resources in so far as such aid is necessary to ensure effective access to justice.

    ...

    54. Having regard to all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the questions referred is that Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 269/2014, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter, must be interpreted as meaning that it includes the release or making available of certain frozen funds or economic resources for the purposes of paying a roll fee and a flat-rate contribution which must be paid, pursuant to the national law, upon lodging a court action against a national measure implementing that regulation.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)