The EU’s highest court decides two appeals concerning EU sanctions against Iran
On 28 November 2013, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) gave judgment in two appeals by the Council of the EU against judgments of the General Court (GC) annulling the asset freezes imposed by the Council on two Iranian companies, Manufacturing Support & Procurement Kala Naft Company (Kala Naft) and Fulmen, and Fulmen’s majority shareholder and chairman, M.
The CJEU set aside the judgement of the GC in Kala Naft and maintained its designation, but dismissed the appeal in Fulmen. The appeal in Fulmen in particular has been watched closely because it was the first case in which the GC found in favour of persons designated, as part of the EU’s sanctions against Iran over concerns about aspects of the latter’s nuclear programme, because of the lack of evidence upon which the designations were made. Since then, the GC has annulled the designations of a number of other persons on similar grounds.
However, the judgment in Kala Naft may cause some concern because the CJEU interpreted the criteria for designation much more widely than the GC, which has generally taken a relatively narrow view…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Stephenson Harwood briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Stephenson Harwood
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Stephenson Harwood
Hot on the heels of its recent decision in Huzar v Jet2, the English Court of Appeal has handed down another passenger-friendly judgment.
Karla Sheerin-Griffin focuses on two of the remedies that are available to a person who has been wronged to obtain information from a person who is not a party to the litigation.
Analysis from The Lawyer
‘Exotic’ investors and opportunities for legal work beyond M&A feature in The Lawyer’s high-level roundtable debate on south-east Europe