Action brought on 24 November 2023 – EuroChem Group v Council
(Case T-1111/23)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: EuroChem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Tuominen and M. Krestiyanova, lawyers)
Defendant: Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
partially annul, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1765 of 13 September 2023 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine,1 and Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1767 of 13 September 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine,2 by removing the following phrases from the contested statements:
• record 721 in Annex I regarding Mr. Melnichenko: “continues to control major fertiliser producer EuroChem Group and coal company SUEK. Since 9 March 2022, Melnichenko transferred his interests in SUEK and Eurochem Group to his spouse, Aleksandra Melnichenko. He continues to benefit from the wealth he transferred to his wife.”; “Function: Non-Executive Director of JSC SUEK”.
• record 1172 in Annex I regarding Mrs. Melnichenko: “who transferred his effective ownership and benefit of the major fertiliser producer EuroChem Group and the coal company SUEK to her on 9 March 2022. (…) In March 2022, Aleksandra Melnichenko replaced her husband as the beneficial owner of Firstline Trust, managed by Linetrust PTC Ltd, a company which represents the ultimate owner of EuroChem Group.”
• record 893 in Annex I regarding Mr Rashevsky: “whilst he continues to exert influence through shell companies. (…) These are major Russian companies – co-owned by Aleksandra Melnichenko, the wife of Russian billionaire Andrei Melnichenko – which generate and provide substantial revenue to the Russian government. They also cooperate with Russian authorities, including Vladimir Putin. SUEK signed contracts with Crimean sanatoriums for employee’s health programs. ”
order the Council to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment when including the applicant’s name in the statement of reasons of the lists of the persons to whom restrictive measures apply.
Second plea in law, alleging failure to state reasons when adopting the contested measures.
Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the right of defence, of the right to a fair hearing, in that they do not provide the applicant with the possibility to effectively exercise its right of defence, in particular the right to be heard, and of the right to an effective judicial remedy.
Fourth plea in law, alleging that the impact of the contested acts on the applicant is disproportionate and infringes Articles 16 and 17 and 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
____________
1 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1765 of 13 September 2023 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2023 L 226, p. 3).
1 Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1767 of 13 September 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2023 L 226, p. 104).