Каталог правовых документов

104314 документа
441

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 June 2026.#Anastasia Ignatova v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds and economic resources – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Concept of ‘immediate family member’ – Concept of ‘benefiting from leading businesspersons operating in Russia’.#Case T-601/24.

cjeu_case ·
442

Case T-676/24: Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2026 – Iran Air v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in response to Iran’s military support for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as for armed groups and entities in the Middle East and the Red Sea region – Transfer by an Iranian state-owned airline of Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicles to Russia – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Error of assessment – Misuse of powers)

cjeu_case ·
443

Case T-603/24: Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2026 – Timchenko v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on entry into the territory of the Member States – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on entry into the territory of the Member States – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Obligation to state reasons – Error of assessment – Right to be heard – Citizenship of the Union – Freedom of movement – Right to property – Proportionality – Non-contractual liability)

cjeu_case ·
444

Case T-602/24: Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2026 – Timchenko v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on entry into the territory of the Member States – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on entry into the territory of the Member States – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Concept of association – Article 2(1), in fine, of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Infringement of essential procedural requirements – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Plea of illegality – Citizenship of the Union – Freedom of movement – Fundamental rights – Proportionality – Non-contractual liability)

cjeu_case ·
445

Case T-601/24: Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2026 – Ignatova v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds and economic resources – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Concept of immediate family member – Concept of benefiting from leading businesspersons operating in Russia)

cjeu_case ·
446

Case T-283/19: Order of the General Court of 10 June 2026 –Germany v ACER (Energy – Internal market for electricity – Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 – Allocation of cross-zonal capacity between bidding zones and congestion management – Determination of common regional methodologies for the calculation of daily and intraday capacity – Action brought against a decision taken by ACER – Decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER replacing the decision by ACER – Annulment in part of the decision of the Board of Appeal – Action which has become devoid of purpose – No longer any interest in bringing proceedings – No need to adjudicate)

cjeu_case ·
450

Ordonnance de la Cour (chambre d’admission des pourvois) du 9 juin 2026.#Swissgrid AG contre Agence de l’Union européenne pour la coopération des régulateurs de l’énergie (ACER).#Pourvoi – Règlement (UE) 2017/2195 – Agence de l’Union européenne pour la coopération des régulateurs de l’énergie (ACER) – Admission des pourvois – Article 170 ter du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Demande ne démontrant pas l’importance d’une question pour l’unité, la cohérence ou le développement du droit de l’Union – Non‑admission du pourvoi.#Affaire C-851/25 P.

cjeu_case ·
451

Order of the Court of 9 June 2026.#Swissgrid AG v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators.#Appeal – Regulation (EU) 2017/2195 – European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-851/25 P.

cjeu_case ·
452

Ordonnance de la Cour (chambre d’admission des pourvois) du 9 juin 2026.#Swissgrid AG contre Agence de l’Union européenne pour la coopération des régulateurs de l’énergie (ACER).#Pourvoi – Règlement (UE) 2017/2195 – Agence de l’Union européenne pour la coopération des régulateurs de l’énergie (ACER) – Admission des pourvois – Article 170 ter du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Demande ne démontrant pas l’importance d’une question pour l’unité, la cohérence ou le développement du droit de l’Union – Non‑admission du pourvoi.#Affaire C-850/25 P.

cjeu_case ·
453

Order of the Court of 9 June 2026.#Swissgrid AG v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators.#Appeal – Regulation (EU) 2017/2195 – European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-850/25 P.

cjeu_case ·
454

Case C-851/25 P: Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 9 June 2026 Appeal brought on 18 December 2025 by Swissgrid AG against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber, sitting with five Judges) of 8 October 2025 – T-558/23, Swissgrid v ACER (Appeal–Regulation (EU) 2017/2195–European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER)–Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed–Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice–Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law–Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed)

cjeu_case ·
455

Case C-850/25 P: Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 9 June 2026 Appeal brought on 18 December 2025 by Swissgrid AG against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber, sitting with five Judges) of 8 October 2025 – T-557/23, Swissgrid v ACER (Appeal–Regulation (EU) 2017/2195–European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER)–Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed–Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice–Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law–Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed)

cjeu_case ·