Action brought on 25 June 2014 – Stavytskyi v Council

(Case T-486/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edward Stavytskyi (Belgium) (represented by: J. Grayston, Solicitor, P. Gjørtler, G. Pandey, D. Rovetta and M. Gambardella, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Annul Council Implementing Decision 2014/216/CFSP of 14 April 2014, implementing Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 111, p. 91), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 381/2014 of 14 April 2014, implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 111, p. 33), in so far as the contested acts include the applicant in the list of persons and entities made subject to the restrictive measures ;

Order the Council to bear the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law concerning infringement of an essential procedural requirement, as well as infringement of the Treaties and of rules of law relating to their application: violation of the right of hearing, violation of the obligation to give notice, insufficient statement of grounds, violation of the right of defence, incorrect legal basis, and manifest error of assessment.

The applicant finds that the Council failed to perform a hearing of the applicant, and that no contrary indications would justify this. Furthermore, the Council failed to notify the Contested Acts to the applicant, and in any case these acts contained an insufficient statement of reasons. Requests for access to information and documents have not been replied to by the Council. By these omissions, the Council violated the right of defence of the applicant, who was denied the possibility of effectively arguing against the findings of the Council, as these findings were withheld from the applicant. Further, the measures taken by the Council do not constitute foreign policy measures, but instead constitute international cooperation in criminal proceedings, which accordingly have been adopted on an incorrect legal basis. Finally, the measures taken by the Council were adopted without proper consideration of relevant facts as well as the case law from the European Court of Human Rights pertaining to criminal procedures in Ukraine, especially in relation to the prosecution of former government officers.