Council Decision of 21 December 2005 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/848/EC (2005/930/EC)

Versions

1. 2005-12-21

Cited by

• Council Decision of 21 December 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (2006/1008/EC) Decision · Grade B

  On 29 May 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/379/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC, and establishing the list of persons and entities to which that Regulation applies.

• Council Decision of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (2006/379/EC) Decision · Grade B

  On 21 December 2005 the Council adopted Decision 2005/930/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/848/EC.

• Council Decision of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (2006/379/EC) Decision · Grade B

  Decision 2005/930/EC is hereby repealed.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  Since then, the Council has adopted a number of common positions and decisions updating the disputed lists. Those in force at the date of the close of the oral procedure were: Common Position 2005/936/CFSP of the Council of 21 December 2005 updating Common Position 2001/931 and repealing Common Position 2005/847/CFSP (OJ 2005 L 340, p. 80), and Council Decision 2005/930/EC of 21 December 2005 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/848/EC (OJ 2005 L 340, p. 64). The applicants name has always been maintained in the disputed lists by the acts thus adopte

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  By letter lodged at the Registry on 25 January 2006, the applicant lodged written observations on the Report for the Hearing, in which it stated inter alia that the action must henceforth also be considered to be directed against Common Position 2005/936 and Decision 2005/930. In the annex to that letter, it attached a further series of new documents. The parties were notified that a decision as to whether those annexes would be put into the case-file would be taken at the hearing.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  In response to a question from the Court, the applicant stated that, as acknowledged by the Council in its observations lodged at the Registry on 23 December 2005 (see paragraph 22 above), the present action must be considered to be directed against Common Position 2005/936 and Decision 2005/930 and also, as the case may be, against all other acts in force on the date the forthcoming judgment is delivered, having the same subject-matter as that common position and decision and having the same effect on it, in so far as those acts concern it.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  As appears from paragraph 17 above, the acts initially challenged by the present action, namely Common Positions 2002/340 and 2002/462 and also Decision 2002/460 (the decision initially contested), have been repealed and replaced on a number of occasions after the application was lodged, by acts which have always maintained the applicant in the disputed lists. On the date on which the oral procedure was closed, those were Common Position 2005/936 and Decision 2005/930.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  Consistently with that case-law, it is therefore appropriate in the present case to allow the applicants request that its action be considered, on the date on which the oral procedure was closed, to seek annulment of Common Position 2005/936 and Decision 2005/930, in so far as those acts concern it, and to allow the parties to reformulate their claims, pleas and arguments in the light of those new factors, which implies, for them, the right to submit additional claims, pleas and arguments.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  It follows that there are no grounds for allowing the applicant to reformulate its claims so that they are directed not only against Common Position 2005/936 and Decision 2005/930, but also, as the case may be, against any other acts in force at the time of the subsequent judgment, having the same subject-matter as those acts and having the same effect on it, in so far as those acts concern it (see paragraph 26 above).

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  Accordingly, for the purposes of the present action, the Court's review will concern only those acts already adopted and still in force and challenged on the date on which the oral procedure closed, namely Common Position 2005/936 (the contested Common Position) and Decision 2005/930 (the contested decision) (collectively the contested acts), even if those acts have in turn been repealed and replaced by other acts before the date of delivery of the present judgment.

• Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) 12 December 2006 Judgment · Grade B

  Annuls, in so far as it concerns the applicant, Council Decision 2005/930/EC of 21 December 2005 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/848/EC;

• Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 20 June 2019 Judgment · Grade B

  By Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21), the Council included the LTTE for the first time on the list provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 14 March 2017 Judgment · Grade B

  By Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21), the Council included the LTTE on that list. Subsequently, that entity remained included on that list under the successive decisions and implementing regulations replacing that list with a new list and repealing the previous decision or implementing regulation. The LTTE was thus included on the list of those whose funds are to be frozen appended to Implementing Regulation No 610/2010.

• Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston delivered on 14 July 2011 Opinion · Grade B

  Annex Date Event 8 October 1997 Designation of PMOI as a foreign terrorist organisation by the United States Secretary of State. 28 March 2001 Order of the United Kingdom Secretary of State for the Home Department, the effect of which was to designate PMOI as a proscribed terrorist organisation in that Member State. April 2001 Opening of the judicial inquiry into the activities of alleged members of PMOI in the French Republic. 28 September 2001 Adoption by the United Nations Security Council of Resolution 1373 (2001). 27 December 2001 Adoption by the Council of Common Position 2001/931 and Re

• Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 15 November 2012 Judgment · Grade B

  The appellant’s name was maintained on the list at issue by subsequent Council decisions, in particular: Council Decision 2003/646/EC of 12 September 2003 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2003/480 (OJ 2003 L 229, p. 22), Council Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21), and the contested acts.

• Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) 9 September 2010 Judgment · Grade B

  In Al-Aqsa the Court annulled Council Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21), in so far as it concerned the applicant, essentially on the ground that it did not contain an adequate statement of reasons.

• Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) 16 October 2014 Judgment · Grade B

  On 29 May 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/379/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21). By Decision 2006/379, the Council placed the applicant, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), on the list relating to frozen funds provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 (the list relating to frozen funds). Its name has remained on that list ever since.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 26 July 2017 Judgment · Grade B

  On 29 May 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/379/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC (OJ 2006 L 144, p. 21). By that decision, the Council placed the LTTE on the list provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 (the list at issue).

• View of Advocate General Mengozzi delivered on 17 May 2010 Opinion · Grade B

  The list provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 has been regularly updated by a number of later decisions, including Council Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC. Those measures have always kept the name of the DHKP-C on the list.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 29 June 2010 Judgment · Grade B

  The inclusion of DHKP-C on the list provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 was maintained by the following subsequent provisions: entry no 18 in Section 2 of the list set out in Article 1 of Council Decision 2002/460/EC of 17 June 2002 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2002/334 (OJ 2002 L 160, p. 26); entry no 19 in Section 2 of the list set out in Article 1 of Council Decision 2002/848/EC of 28 October 2002 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2002/460 (OJ 2002 L 295, p. 12); entry no 20 in Secti