Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2008 of 22 December 2008 amending for the 103rd time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban

Versions

1. 2008-12-22

Cited by

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 28 May 2013 — Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v Council of the European Union, European Commission (Case C-239/12 P) Notice · Grade B

  AppealCommon foreign and security policy (CFSP)Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the TalibanRegulation (EC) No 881/2002Action for annulmentRemoval of the interested party from the list of persons and entities concernedInterest in bringing proceedings2013/C 225/57Language of the case: English Appellant: Abdulbasit Abdulrahim (represented by: P. Moser QC and E. Grieves, Barrister, instructed by H. Miller, Solicitor) Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Finnega

• Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2015 — Abdulrahim v Council and Commission (Case T-127/09 RENV) Notice · Grade B

  (Referral back after setting aside of orderCommon foreign and security policyRestrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the TalibanRegulation (EC) No 881/2002Freezing of funds and economic resources of a person named in a list drawn up by a body of the United NationsNaming of that person in the list in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002Action for annulmentAdmissibilityPeriod allowed for commencing proceedingsExceededExcusable errorFundamental rightsRights of the defenceRight to effective judicial protectionRi

• Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2015 — Abdulrahim v Council and Commission (Case T-127/09 RENV) Notice · Grade B

  Annuls Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2008 of 22 December 2008 amending for the 103rd time Council Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, in so far as it concerns Mr Abdulbasit Abdulrahim;

• Order of the General Court of 28 February 2012 — Abdulrahim v Council and Commission (Case T-127/09) Notice · Grade B

  Common foreign and security policyRestrictive measures directed against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the TalibanRegulation (EC) No 881/2002Removal of the interested party from the list of persons and entities concernedAction for annulmentNo need to adjudicateClaim for damagesCausal linkNone2012/C 126/32Language of the case: English Applicant: Abdulbasit Abdulrahim (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: initially J. Jones, Barrister, and M. Arani, Solicitor, and subsequently by E. Grieves, Barrister, and H. Miller, Solicitor) Defendants: Coun

• Order of the General Court of 1 September 2011 — Maftah v Commission (Case T-101/09) Notice · Grade B

  Action for annulmentPeriod allowed for commencing proceedingsOut of timeNo force majeureNo excusable errorInadmissibility2011/C 319/40Language of the case: English Applicant: Elmabruk Maftah (South Harrow, Middlesex, United Kingdom) (represented by: E. Grieves, Barrister, and A. McMurdie, Solicitor) Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Paasivirta and M. Konstantinidis, Agents) Intervening party on behalf of the defendant: Council of the European Union, represented by R. Szostak, G. Étienne, M.-M. Josephides and E. Finnegan, Agents APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Regulatio

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  In Case T‑127/09 RENV, Abdulbasit Abdulrahim, residing in London (United Kingdom), represented by P. Moser QC, E. Grieves, Barrister, H. Miller and R. Graham, Solicitors, applicant,v Council of the European Union, represented by E. Finnegan and G. Étienne, acting as Agents, and European Commission, represented by E. Paasivirta and G. Valero Jordana, acting as Agents, defendants, APPLICATION initially for (i) partial annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama b

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  By Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2008 of 22 December 2008 amending for the 103rd time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban (OJ 2008 L 345, p. 60), Mr Abdulrahim’s name was consequently added to the list of persons and entities whose funds and other economic resources were to be frozen pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  Point 1 of the annex to Regulation No 1330/2008 provides the following reasons for adding Mr Abdulrahim’s name to the above list: …Other information: (a) … ; (b) Involved in fundraising on behalf of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group [the LIFG]; (c) Held senior positions within the LIFG in the United Kingdom; (d) Associated with the Directors of the Sanabel Relief Agency, Ghuma Abd’rabbah, Taher Nasuf and Abdulbaqi Mohammed Khaled and with members of the LIFG in the United Kingdom, including Ismail Kamoka, a senior member of the LIFG in the United Kingdom who has been convicted and sentenced in

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  Recital 5 in the preamble of Regulation No 1330/2008 states: [s]ince the [Sanctions Committee list] does not provide the current addresses for the natural persons concerned, a notice should be published in the Official Journal so that the persons concerned can contact the Commission and that the Commission can subsequently communicate the grounds on which this Regulation is based to the natural persons concerned, provide them with the opportunity to comment on these grounds and review this Regulation in view of the comments and possible available additional information. The notice in question

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  By application, the signed original of which was received at the Court’s Registry on 15 April 2009, Mr Abdulrahim brought an action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities, seeking, in essence, (i) annulment of Regulation No 881/2002, as amended by Regulation No 1330/2008, or of Regulation No 1330/2008, in so far as those acts concern him and (ii) compensation for the damage allegedly caused by those acts. The action was registered as Case T‑127/09.

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  In his observations, lodged at the Court’s Registry on 13 August 2013, Mr Abdulrahim claims that the General Court should: annul Regulation No 1330/2008 in so far as it concerns him; award him costs in relation to the proceedings before the General Court (both prior to and subsequent to referral back by the Court of Justice) and, in any event, to the proceedings before the Court of Justice.

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  In this case, it is common ground that the period of two months for bringing proceedings laid down in the fifth paragraph of Article 230 EC, as calculated by the parties from the end of the fourteenth day following publication of Regulation No 1330/2008 in the Official Journal, in accordance with Article 102(1) of the Rules of Procedure, and extended by the single period of 10 days on account of distance provided for by Article 102(2) of those rules, expired on 16 March 2009.

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  The action appears also to have been brought out of time if, instead of calculating the time-limit from the publication of Regulation No 1330/2008 in the Official Journal, on 23 December 2008, as the parties did in their written pleadings, it is calculated from the date of the notice published for the attention of the persons concerned in the Official Journal on 30 December 2008 (see paragraph 4 above), as ruled by the Court of Justice in the judgment of 23 April 2013 in Joined Cases C‑478/11 P to C‑482/11 P Gbagbo and Others v Council [2013] ECR, paragraphs 53 to 59).

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  Nor do the documents annexed to the Commission’s response to the measure of organisation of procedure, lodged at the Court’s Registry on 20 January 2014, permit the Court to hold that the grounds applied to Mr Abdulrahim are well founded. It may be added that it is plain that those documents are a priori of no relevance since, for the most part, they post-date both the listing of Mr Abdulrahim’s name in the Sanctions Committee list and the adoption of Regulation No 1330/2008 and since they consequently could not have been taken into consideration, by either the Sanctions Committee or the Commi

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  In those circumstances, Regulation No 1330/2008 must be annulled, on the legal grounds stated in the preceding paragraph (see, to that effect, Kadi II, paragraph 164), and there is therefore no need to rule on the other pleas, complaints and arguments of Mr Abdulrahim.

• Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) 14 January 2015 Judgment · Grade B

  Annuls Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2008 of 22 December 2008 amending for the 103rd time Council Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, in so far as it concerns Mr Abdulbasit Abdulrahim;

• Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 22 January 2013 Case C-239/12 P Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v Council of the European Union and European Commission Opinion · Grade B

  This is an appeal against the order of the General Court of 28 February 2012 in Case T-127/09 Abdulrahim v Council and Commission (the order under appeal) by which the General Court ruled, in particular, that there was no longer any need to adjudicate on the action for annulment which Mr Abdulrahim had brought against 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

• Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 22 January 2013 Case C-239/12 P Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v Council of the European Union and European Commission Opinion · Grade B

  By Regulation No 1330/2008, Mr Abdulrahim’s name was accordingly added to the list of persons and entities whose funds and other economic resources must be frozen under Council Regulation No 881/2002 (the list at issue).

• Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 22 January 2013 Case C-239/12 P Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v Council of the European Union and European Commission Opinion · Grade B

  By application, the signed original of which was received at the General Court Registry on 15 April 2009, Mr Abdulrahim brought an action against the Council of the European Union and the European Commission, seeking essentially: (i) annulment of Regulation No 881/2002 or of Regulation No 1330/2008, in so far as those acts concern him; and (ii) compensation for the damage allegedly caused by those acts. That action was registered as Case T-127/09.

• Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 22 January 2013 Case C-239/12 P Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v Council of the European Union and European Commission Opinion · Grade B

  In paragraph 27 of that order, the General Court found that by Regulation No 36/2011 the Commission deleted the entry relating to Mr Abdulrahim’s name from the list at issue, originally made by Regulation No 1330/2008. Such a deletion entails the repeal of Regulation No 1330/2008 in so far as that act concerned Mr Abdulrahim. According to the General Court, in paragraph 28 of the order under appeal, that repeal leads, for Mr Abdulrahim, to the desired outcome and gives him full satisfaction, given that, following the adoption of Regulation No 36/2011, he is no longer subject to the restrictive