Appeal brought on 17 November 2005 by Yassin Abdullah Kadi against the judgment made on 21 September 2005 by the Second Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-315/01 between Yassin Abdullah Kadi and the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities.
(Case C-402/05 P)
(Language of the case: English)
An appeal against the judgment made on 21 September 2005 by the Second Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-315/01 between Yassin Abdullah Kadi and the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 17 November 2005 by Yassin Abdullah Kadi, residing in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia), represented by Ian Brownlie CBE QC, David Anderson QC, Pushpinder Saini, Barrister and Guy Martin, Solicitor, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
The Appellant claims that the Court should:
a) set aside, in whole, the decision of the Court of First Instance.
b) make a declaration that Council Regulation (EC) No. 881/2002 of 27 May 2002
1 is void and a nullity.
c) order that the Council and/or Commission pay the Appellant's costs of this appeal and of the proceedings before the Court of First Instance.
Pleas in law and main arguments:
The applicant submits that the Court of First Instance erred in law in holding that Art. 308 CE, in conjunction with Arts. 60 and 301 CE, was a sufficient legal basis for Regulation 881/2002.
The applicant further submits that the Court of First Instance erred in its interpretation of the relevant principles of international law:-
the Court's judgement conflates the question of the UN Charter as a source of treaty obligations with the different question of the effects for Member States of decisions of the Security Council;
the Court erred in law in assuming that resolutions of the Security Council adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter are to be automatically inserted into the sphere of domestic law and jurisdiction;
the Court erred in holding that it has no power to review the lawfulness of Security Council resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter;
the reasoning of the Court exhibits a substantial inconsistency in its treatment of the principle of jus cogens;
the Court has failed to appreciate the legal significance of the failure of the Security Council to establish an independent international court.
____________1 - Council Regulation (EC) NO 881/2002 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 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan, OJ L 139, 29.05.2002, p. 9-22