Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 6 October 2015

1. Actions for annulmentActionable measuresConceptHypothetical measures not yet adoptedNot included (Art. 263 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court (1991), Art. 44(1)(c)) (see paras 60-63)

2. Judicial proceedingsDecision or regulation replacing the contested measure in the course of proceedingsNew factorExtension of the initial pleadingsApplication to amend annulment pleaTime-limit for the submission of such an applicationPoint from which time starts to runDate of communication of the new measure to the applicant (Art. 263, sixth para., TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court (1991), Arts 101 and 102(2); Council Decision 2010/639/CFSP, 2012/642/CFSP, Art. 6(2), and 2013/534/CFSP; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Art. 8a(2), No 1017/2012 and No 1054/2013) (see paras 65, 68, 71-78)

3. Judicial proceedingsDecision or regulation replacing the contested measure in the course of proceedingsNew factorExtension of the initial pleadingsApplication to amend annulment pleaTime-limit for the submission of such an applicationPoint from which time starts to runDate of notification of the new measure to the applicant’s representativeConditionNotification to the representative expressly provided for by a regulation or by an agreement between the parties (Art. 263, sixth para., TFEU; Council Decisions 2012/642/CFSP, Art. 6(2), and 2013/534/CFSP; Council Regulations No 765/2006, Art. 8a(2), and No 1054/2013) (see paras 80-83)

4. Actions for annulmentNatural or legal personsMeasures of direct and individual concern to themRestrictive measures against BelarusRegulation carrying out a re-examination of the list of persons, groups or entities covered and complementing that list without repealing itAction brought by a person appearing on the list but not mentioned in the said regulationAdmissibility (Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU; Council Regulations No 765/2006 and No 1159/2014) (see paras 92-98)

5. Actions for annulmentGroundsLack of or inadequate statement of reasonsSeparate ground from the one concerning substantive legality (Arts 263 TFEU and 296 TFEU) (see paras 111, 112)

6. Acts of the institutionsStatement of reasonsObligationScopeRestrictive measures against BelarusFreezing of funds of certain persons and bodies in view of the situation in BelarusMinimum requirements (Art. 296 TFEU) (see paras 113-119)

7. Common foreign and security policyRestrictive measures against BelarusFreezing of funds of certain persons and bodies in view of the situation in BelarusObligation to extend that measure to entities owned or controlled by such an entityConditionsActs instituting restrictive measures providing for the application of the latter to the said owned or controlled entitiesNames of persons and entities holding or controlling the entities concerned having to be validly entered in the list of persons concerned by the restrictive measures (Council Decisions 2010/639/CFSP, 2012/642/CFSP, 2012/171/CFSP and 2014/750/CFSP; Council Regulations No 765/2006, No 265/2012, No 1017/2012 and No 1159/2014) (see paras 133-137, 147, 148, 184, 185, 188)

8. European UnionJudicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutionsRestrictive measures against BelarusFreezing of funds of certain persons and bodies in view of the situation in BelarusAmbit of the reviewObligation on the competent EU authority to establish, in the event of challenge, that the grounds held against the persons or entities concerned well-founded (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Decisions 2010/639/CFSP, 2012/171/CFSP, 2012/642/CFSP, 2013/534/CFSP and 2014/750/CFSP; Council Regulations No 765/2006, No 265/2012, No 1017/2012, No 1054/2013 and No 1159/2014) (see paras 164, 165)

Re:

APPLICATION for the annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2012/171/CFSP of 23 March 2012 implementing Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2012 L 87, p. 95), of Council Implementing Decision (EU) No 265/2012 of 23 March 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2012 L 87, p. 37), Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2012 L 285, p. 1), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1017/2012 of 6 November 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2012 L 307, p. 7), Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642 (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 69), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 1), Council Decision 2014/750/CFSP of 30 October 2014 amending Council Decision 2012/642 (OJ 2014 L 311, p. 39) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1159/2014 of 30 October 2014 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2014 L 311, p. 2), in so far as those acts apply to the applicants.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision 2012/171/CFSP of 23 March 2012 implementing Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 265/2012 of 23 March 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1017/2012 of 6 November 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus in so far as they relate to Mr Yury Aleksandrovich Chyzh, Triple TAA, NefteKhimTrading STAA, Askargoterminal ZAT, Bereza Silicate Products Plant AAT, Variant TAA, Triple-Dekor STAA, KvartsMelProm SZAT, Altersolutions SZAT, Prostoremarket SZAT, AquaTriple STAA, Rakovsky brovar TAA, TriplePharm STAA and Triple-Veles TAA;

2. Annuls Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus in so far as they relate to NefteKhimTrading, Askargoterminal, Bereza Silicate Products Plant, Triple-Dekor, KvartsMelProm, Altersolutions, Prostoremarket, AquaTriple, Rakovsky brovar and Triple-Veles;

3. Annuls Council Decision 2014/750/CFSP of 30 October 2014 amending Decision 2012/642 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1159/2014 of 30 October 2014 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus in so far as they relate to Mr Chyzh, Triple, Askargoterminal, Bereza Silicate Products Plant, Triple-Dekor, KvartsMelProm, Altersolutions, Prostoremarket, AquaTriple, Variant and Rakovsky brovar;

4. Dismisses the action as inadmissible in so far as it seeks annulment of Decision 2013/534 and Implementing Regulation No 1054/2013 in so far as they concern Mr Chyzh, Triple, Variant and TriplePharm;

5. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

6. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Mr Chyzh, Triple, NefteKhimTrading, Askargoterminal, Bereza Silicate Products Plant, Triple-Dekor, KvartsMelProm, Altersolutions, Prostoremarket, AquaTriple, Variant, Rakovsky brovar, TriplePharm and Triple-Veles.