CJEU - T-830/14 / Judgment

Farahat v. Council
Policy area
Foreign and security policy
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding body
GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber)
Type
Decision
Decision date
09/09/2016
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:T:2016:462

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Title VI: Justice

Article 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial

VIEW FULL CASE
  • CJEU - T-830/14 / Judgment

    Key facts of the case:

    Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken against Syria — Freezing of funds — Error of assessment

    Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:

    On those grounds, THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber) hereby:

    1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision No 2014/730/CFSP of 20 October 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1105/2014 of 20 October 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria in so far as they apply to Mohamed Farahat;
    2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Farahat.
  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter
    1. According to the case-law, the effectiveness of the judicial review guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires, in particular, as part of the review of the lawfulness of the grounds which are the basis of the decision to include a given entity in the lists of entities subject to sanctions, the Courts of the European Union to satisfy themselves that that decision rests on a sufficiently solid factual basis. That entails checking the factual allegations in the summary of reasons underlying that decision, with the consequence that judicial review is not to be restricted to assessment of the cogency in the abstract of the reasons relied upon, but must deal with the question whether those reasons, or, at the very least, one of them, deemed sufficient in itself to support that decision, have or has been substantiated (judgment of 18 July 2013, Commission and Others v Kadi, C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, EU:C:2013:518, paragraph 119).