CJEU - C 630/13P / Judgment

Issam Anbouba v Council of the European Union
Policy area
Foreign and security policy
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding body
Court of Justice of the European Union / Court (Grand Chamber)
Decision date
ECLI (European case law identifier)
  • CJEU - C 630/13P / Judgment

    Key facts of the case:

    (Appeal — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against the Syrian Arab Republic — Measures directed against persons and entities benefiting from the regime — Proof that inclusion on the lists is well founded — Set of indicia)

    Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:

    The Court (Grand Chamber) hereby:

    1. Dismisses the appeal;
    2. Orders Mr Issam Anbouba to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;
    3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.
  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter


    46. In that regard, it should be noted that the effectiveness of the judicial review guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that, as part of the review of the lawfulness of the grounds which are the basis of the decision to include a person’s name on the list of persons subject to restrictive measures, the Courts of the European Union are to ensure that that decision, which affects that person individually, is taken on a sufficiently solid factual basis. That entails, in this instance, a verification of the factual allegations in the summary of reasons underpinning the acts at issue, in order to review whether those reasons, or, at the very least, one of those reasons, deemed sufficient in itself to support those acts, is substantiated (see, to this effect, judgments in Commission and Others v Kadi, C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, EU:C:2013:518, paragraph 119, and Council v Manufacturing Support & Procurement Kala Naft, C‑348/12 P, EU:C:2013:776, paragraph 73).


    56. In so doing, the General Court observed the principles, stemming from the case-law recalled in paragraph 46 of the present judgment, that relate to review of the lawfulness of the grounds which are the basis of acts such as the acts at issue.