Notice for the OJ
SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1Action brought on 12 February 2004 by Faraj Hassan against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities
(Case T-49/04)
Language of the case: English
An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 12 February 2004 by Faraj Hassan, London, United Kingdom, represented by Mr E.Grieves, Barrister and Mr H. Miller Solicitor.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
- annul Council Regulation (EC) No. 881/2002 of 27 May 2002, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2049/2003 20 November 2003 and/or Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2049/2003 in its entirety and/or in respect of the proscription of the applicant;
- alternatively, declare the aforementioned Regulations inapplicable in respect of their applications to the applicant; and
- Order the Council to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings;
- Order the Council to pay damages
Pleas in law and main arguments:
Regulation 881/20021 makes provision for the freezing of funds and economic resources of persons listed in its Annex I. Article 7 paragraph 1 of that regulation authorises the Commission to amend or supplement Annex I on the basis of determinations made by either the United Nations Security Council or the Sanctions Committee. In November 2003 the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council listed the applicant as a person to whom freezing of funds and assets should apply. By Regulation 2049/20032Official Journal L 303 , 21/11/2003 P. 0020 - 0021 the Commission amended Annex I to Regulation 881/20021, adding the applicant's name to it.
The applicant contests these measures invoking breaches of his fundamental human rights. He submits that the effect of the contested measures is to annihilate his peaceful enjoyment of his property and his private and family life, contrary to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and of Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the same Convention. The applicant further submits that the defendants wholly failed to provide him, both before and after the decision was taken, with a fair hearing or effective remedy to counter any assertions of fact relied upon. According to the applicant this constitutes a violation of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, the applicant claims that the contested measures violate the principle of proportionality.
____________1 - Council Regulation (EC) No 88/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/200 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freezing of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan, Official Journal L 39 , 29/05/2002 P. 0009 - 0022 2 - Commission Regulation (EC) No 049/003 of 0 November 003 amending for the 5th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/00 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/001