{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-695-23-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-695-23-p)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-15","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:8d311e","proof":"sha256:e619b48e0260fa7977e94fb267242953cbf5db56bbcec4787f4391154b715fea","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"eu:c-695-23-p","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17"],"kind":"front_matter"},{"title":"Judgment","paragraphs":["para_18","para_19"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Legal context and background to the dispute","paragraphs":["para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"Decision 2014/145","paragraphs":["para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"Regulation No 2 69/2014","paragraphs":["para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"The acts at issue","paragraphs":["para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"The procedure before the General Court and the judgment under appeal","paragraphs":["para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"The appeal","paragraphs":["para_62","para_63"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"The first ground of appeal","paragraphs":["para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":["para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"Findings of the Court","paragraphs":["para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":["para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Findings of the Court","paragraphs":["para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Costs","paragraphs":["para_127","para_128","para_129"],"kind":"costs"},{"title":"On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby:","paragraphs":["para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141"],"kind":"operative"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Tenth Chamber)","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"15 October 2026 ( * )","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"( Appeal – Restrictive measures taken in view of the military aggression against Ukraine – Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 2(1) in fine – Restrictive measures imposed on a natural person associated with another natural person who is in turn subject to restrictive measures – Concept of ‘association’ in the case of two persons with a family relationship between them )","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"In Case C‑695/23 P,","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 16 November 2023,","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"Galina Evgenyevna Pumpyanskaya, residing in Ekaterinburg (Russia), represented initially by A. Egger, P. Goeth, G. Lansky and E. Steiner, Rechtsanwälte, and subsequently by M.F. Ciancio and A. Saccucci, avvocati,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"the other party to the proceedings being:","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Council of the European Union, represented by B. Driessen and S. Van Overmeire, acting as Agents,","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"defendant at first instance,","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"THE COURT (Tenth Chamber),","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"composed of B. Smulders, President of the Chamber, M.L. Arastey Sahún (Rapporteur), President of the Fifth Chamber, and J. Passer, Judge,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Advocate General: L. Medina,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"Registrar: V. Di Bucci,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"having regard to the written procedure,","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"gives the following","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Judgment","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"1         By her appeal, the appellant seeks to have set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 6 September 2023, Pumpyanskaya v Council (T‑272/22, ‘the judgment under appeal’, EU:T:2023:491), by which the General Court dismissed her action seeking annulment of Council Deci …","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"Legal context and background to the dispute","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"2         The factual and legal background of the present case is set out in paragraphs 2 to 17 of the judgment under appeal. For the purposes of the present case, that background may be summarised and supplemented as follows.","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"3         The case arises in the context of the restrictive measures adopted by the European Union since 2014 in response to actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"4         The appellant is a Russian national.","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"5         On 17 March 2014, the Council of the European Union adopted, on the basis of Article 29 TEU, Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 78, p. 16).","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"6         On the same date, the Council adopted, on the basis of Article 215(2) TFEU, Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 78, p. 6).","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Decision 2014/145","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"7         Article 1(1) of Decision 2014/145, as amended, inter alia, by Decision 2022/329 (‘Decision 2014/145’), requires Member States to take the necessary measures, subject to the derogations set out in Article 1(2), (3) and (6), to prevent the entry into, or transit through, their territories of, inter alia, natural persons meeting the criteria laid down in point (e) of Article 1(1) and natural persons associated with them.","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"8         Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145 provides for the freezing of the funds and economic resources belonging, inter alia, to natural persons meeting the criteria defined in that point (g) and to natural persons associated with them, that criteria being, in essence, identical to that laid down in Article 1(1)(e) of that decision. Article 2(1) of that decision reads as follows:","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"‘All funds and economic resources belonging to, or owned, held or controlled by:","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"(g)      leading businesspersons or legal persons, entities or bodies involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation, which is responsible for the annexation of Crimea and the destabilisation of Ukraine,","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"and natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them, as listed in the Annex, shall be frozen.’","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"9         Article 2(3) to (5), (7) and (8) of Decision 2014/145 provides, in essence, that the competent authorities of the Member States may, in certain circumstances and under certain conditions, authorise the release of certain frozen funds or economic resources and authorise payments to certain …","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"10       Under the third paragraph of Article 6 of that decision, the decision is to be kept under constant review and is to be renewed, or amended as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"Regulation No 2 69/2014","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"11       Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation No 269/2014, as amended, inter alia, by Regulation 2022/330 (‘Regulation No 269/2014’), provides, in conjunction with Article 2 of that regulation, for the freezing of funds and economic resources belonging, inter alia, to natural persons meeting the criteria defined in that point (g), and to natural persons associated with them, in terms identical to those of Article 2(1)(g) in fine of Decision 2014/145.","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"12       Articles 4 to 6b of that regulation reproduce, in essence, the same provisions as those contained in paragraphs 3 to 5, 7 and 8 respectively of Article 2 of Decision 2014/145.","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"13       Article 14(4) of Regulation No 269/2014 provides that the list in Annex I to that regulation is to be reviewed at regular intervals and at least every 12 months.","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"The acts at issue","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"14       On 9 March 2022, in view of the gravity of the situation in Ukraine, the Council adopted the acts at issue. By those acts, the appellant’s name was added respectively to the list annexed to Decision 2014/145 and to that in Annex I to Regulation No 269/2014, on the following grounds:","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"‘[The appellant] is the Chairwoman of the Board of trustees of BF “Sinara”, a foundation that acts as operator of charitable activities of large companies, including PJSC Pipe Metallurgical Company. She is the spouse of Dmitry Alexandrovich [Pumpyanskiy], Chairman of the Board of Directors of PJSC P …","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"[The appellant] is therefore a natural person associated with a leading businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation, which is responsible for the annexation of Crimea and the destabilisation of Ukraine.’","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"The procedure before the General Court and the judgment under appeal","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"15       By application lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 17 May 2022, the appellant brought an action seeking annulment of the acts at issue in so far as they concern her. In the context of her action for annulment, she disputed, by a first plea in law, the Council’s assessment that he …","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"16       In the judgment under appeal, the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action. Having found, in paragraphs 49 to 60 of that judgment, that the Council did not err in its assessment by including the appellant’s husband on the list annexed to Decision 2014/145 and in Annex I to Regulation …","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"17       In that latter regard, the General Court stated, in paragraph 63 of the judgment under appeal, that the concept of ‘association’ refers to natural or legal persons who are generally connected by common interests, without, however, it being necessary for there to be a relationship by means o …","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"18       The General Court also rejected, in paragraph 121 of the judgment under appeal, the second plea, alleging failure to observe the principle of proportionality and infringement of the appellant’s fundamental rights. In essence, it found, in paragraphs 89 to 109 of that judgment, that the limi …","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"19       Having thus rejected the two pleas in law put forward by the appellant, the General Court, in paragraph 121 of the judgment under appeal, dismissed the action in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"Procedure before the Court and forms of order sought","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"20       By her appeal, the appellant claims that the Court should:","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"–        set aside the judgment under appeal;","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"–        give final judgment in the matter and annul the acts at issue in so far as they concern her, and","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"–        order the Council to pay the costs, including those incurred at first instance, or","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"–        alternatively, set aside the judgment under appeal, refer the case back to the General Court and reserve the costs.","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"21       The Council contends that the Court should:","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"–        dismiss the appeal;","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"–        alternatively, if the Court decides to set aside the judgment under appeal and dispose of the case, dismiss the action on the merits; and","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"–        order the appellant to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"22       By decision of 18 September 2024, the President of the Court of Justice decided to stay proceedings pending delivery of the judgment in Case C‑696/23. On 26 March 2026, the Court handed down its judgment in Pumpyanskiy and Others v Council (C‑696/23 P, C‑704/23 P, C‑711/23 P, C‑35/24 P and C‑111/24 P, EU:C:2026:245). By decision of the same date, proceedings were resumed in the present case.","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"23       By letters from the Registry of the Court of Justice of 21 April 2026, the parties were informed that that judgment had been delivered and were asked about the possible consequences that might be inferred from it for the purposes of the present case. The Council and the appellant lodged their observations in that regard by letters of 13 May 2026 and of 21 May 2026 respectively.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"The appeal","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"24       In support of her appeal, the appellant puts forward three grounds of appeal alleging errors of law made by the General Court (i) in holding that her husband could be classified as a ‘leading businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Govern …","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"The first ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"25       By her first ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law by holding, in paragraphs 49 and 54 of the judgment under appeal, that the Council did not make an error of assessment in classifying her husband as a ‘leading businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation’ within the meaning of the (g) criterion.","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"26       The Council contends that the first ground of appeal is inadmissible in so far as the appellant seeks to challenge the General Court’s findings and factual assessments. In any event, the Council disputes the merits of the appellant’s arguments.","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"27       The Court notes that, when asked about the consequences to be inferred from the judgment of 26 March 2026, Pumpyanskiy and Others v Council (C‑696/23 P, C‑704/23 P, C‑711/23 P, C‑35/24 P and C‑111/24 P, EU:C:2026:245), the appellant declared that she was withdrawing her first ground of appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"28       In those circumstances, there is no longer any need to rule on that ground or on the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Council.","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"The second ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"29       By her second ground of appeal, the appellant submits that the General Court erred in law by finding that the Council was entitled to classify her as a person ‘associated’ with her husband within the meaning of the criterion of association. According to the appellant, the General Court, in …","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"30       Furthermore, by holding, in that paragraph and in paragraph 70 of the judgment under appeal, that the concept of ‘association’ covers persons connected by common interests going beyond the family relationship between them, in her view the General Court adopted, in breach of the principle of …","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"31       The appellant also claims that the General Court erred in law by holding that she entertained a business relationship with her husband. First of all, the appellant claims that, contrary to the General Court’s statement in paragraph 64 of the judgment under appeal, she never held any positio …","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"32       Furthermore, the appellant complains that the General Court considered that the respective activities carried out by her and her husband in different entities established to the requisite standard the existence of a business relationship between them. She argues in particular that the Gener …","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"33       The appellant also submits that the General Court was unclear in its finding, in paragraphs 64, 70, 71 and 74 of the judgment under appeal, that she was associated with her husband based on both a business relationship and a common interest. Furthermore, according to the appellant, the judg …","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"34       In addition, the appellant argues that the application of restrictive measures to a non-executive member of the board of trustees of a charity, such as the appellant, would not be consistent with the objectives pursued both by Article 21 TEU and by the acts at issue and not founded, under Article 215 TFEU, on a sufficient nexus with the third State against which the European Union takes a stand, namely, in the present case, the Russian Federation.","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"35       Finally, the appellant submits that the judgments cited by the General Court in support of its interpretation of the concept of association, namely the judgments of 8 March 2023, Prigozhina v Council (T‑212/22, EU:T:2023:104); of 28 July 2016, Tomana and Others v Council and Commission (C‑3 …","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"36       While taking the view that, by her arguments summarised in paragraph 32 of the present judgment, the appellant seeks to challenge the General Court’s factual determinations, which would render them inadmissible, the Council disputes the merits of all of the appellant’s arguments.","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"37       In the first place, the appellant’s complaint alleging failure by the General Court to observe the principle of legal certainty in its interpretation of the concept of ‘association’ in paragraph 63 of the judgment under appeal must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"38       In that regard, it must be recalled that that principle requires, on the one hand, that the rules of law be clear and precise and, on the other, that their application be foreseeable for those subject to the law, in particular where they may have adverse consequences. It requires, inter ali …","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"39       In paragraph 63 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court held, in essence, that the concept of ‘association’ refers to persons who are generally connected by common interests without it being necessary for there to be a relationship by means of an economic activity or it being based exclusively on a family relationship.","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"40       First of all, that definition does not amount to limiting the concept of association, as far as natural persons are concerned, to the existence of a mere family relationship. The interpretation adopted by the General Court means that it is necessary to establish common interests that object …","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"41       Moreover, the General Court, in paragraph 63 of the judgment under appeal, identified sufficiently clear and precise criteria for the purpose of applying that concept in the case of two persons who have a family relationship, even though the General Court was not required to refer in detail …","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"42       In the second place, contrary to the appellant’s assertions, the General Court did not, in paragraphs 64, 65, 70, 71, 74 to 76, and 78 of the judgment under appeal, place undue weight on the family relationship between her and her husband. While it is true that the General Court repeatedly …","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"43       Furthermore, the General Court was not unclear when it allegedly found that the appellant was associated with her husband by means both of a business relationship and of common interests. Indeed, it is apparent from paragraphs 70 and 71 of the judgment under appeal, read in conjunction with …","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"44       In the third place, in claiming that the General Court erred in its statement, in paragraph 64 of the judgment under appeal, that she held positions within TMK or Group Sinara, the appellant misreads that paragraph. In that paragraph, the General Court merely noted that the Council had conc …","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"45       As regards, in the fourth place, the appellant’s arguments summarised in paragraph 32 of the present judgment, the admissibility of which is disputed by the Council, it should be borne in mind that, under Article 256 TFEU and Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European …","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"46       Moreover, where an appellant alleges that the General Court distorted facts or evidence, that person must, under Article 256 TFEU, the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and Article 168(1)(d) of the Rules of Procedure, indicate precise …","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"47       First, as regards the appellant’s argument that the General Court concluded, incorrectly, that there was a business relationship between her and her husband whereas her husband had divested himself of his shares in those companies and had formally held a position within the governing bodies …","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"48       Second, the remainder of the appellant’s arguments summarised in paragraph 32 of the present judgment must be declared admissible in their entirety, in the light of the case-law referred to in paragraph 45 of the present judgment. Contrary to the Council’s contentions, the appellant, by tho …","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"49       Third, in the light of the considerations set out in paragraphs 40 to 43 of the present judgment, it must be held that, contrary to the appellant’s assertions, the General Court did not err in law by holding, in essence, in paragraph 70 of the judgment under appeal, that, depending on the c …","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"50       With regard more specifically to the General Court’s alleged error of law in paragraph 78 of the judgment under appeal, suffice it to note that, contrary to the appellant’s submissions and as is expressly stated in paragraph 77 of that judgment, the General Court did not disregard the fact …","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"51       In paragraph 78 of that judgment, read in conjunction with paragraph 70 thereof, the General Court correctly held, in accordance with the definition of the concept of ‘association’ given in paragraph 63 of that judgment and reproduced, in essence, in paragraph 39 of the present judgment, th …","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"52       As regards the alleged distortion of the evidence by the General Court in paragraph 70 of the judgment under appeal, it should be noted that the General Court, far from ignoring the content of the evidence in question, did state, in paragraph 69 of that judgment, that BF Sinara Foundation c …","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"53       In the fifth place, as regards the appellant’s argument that the business relationship found by the General Court to exist between the appellant and her husband is not of a sufficient degree to be regarded as objectively going beyond the common interests which two family members may usually …","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"54       In the sixth place, as regards the appellant’s argument that the application of restrictive measures to her situation is not consistent with the objectives pursued by Article 21 TEU and is not founded, under Article 215 TFEU, on a sufficient nexus with the Russian Federation, it must be not …","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"55       However, by the abovementioned argument and in the absence of any reference to any specific paragraph of the judgment under appeal in the context of that argument, it seems that the appellant is not seeking to criticise the General Court’s legal reasoning in the judgment under appeal, but r …","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"56       Second, in so far as the appellant, in that she refers in that regard to the first part of her third ground of appeal, intends, by that argument, only to anticipate, partially, a similar argument which she puts forward in the context of the first part of her third ground of appeal concerning observance of the principle of legal certainty, that argument will be dealt with when that part is examined.","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"57       In the seventh place, as regards the argument by which the appellant complains that the General Court relied, in the judgment under appeal, on case-law precedents whose factual circumstances she claims are fundamentally different from those of the present case, suffice it to note, in additi …","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"58       In the light of the foregoing, the second ground of appeal must be dismissed.","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"The third ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"59       By her third ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law by ruling, in essence, that the restrictive measures adopted by the Council against her were proportionate and did not infringe her fundamental rights or fail to observe the principle of legal certainty.","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"60       By the first part of her third ground of appeal, the appellant submits that the General Court erred in law by holding, in paragraphs 119 and 120 of the judgment under appeal, that the criterion of association does not fail to observe the principle of legal certainty, even though it establis …","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"61       Moreover, she claims that the General Court attempted in vain to justify, in paragraph 116 of the judgment under appeal, the unfettered discretion provided to the Council by referring to the legal framework clearly delimited by the objectives pursued by the EU legislation adopted in the con …","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"62       By the second part of her third ground of appeal, the appellant criticises the General Court for refusing to find that the restrictive measures to which she and her husband are subject were not appropriate for serving to attain the objective pursued by the acts at issue, which, as is appare …","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"63       The appellant also states that, in paragraphs 96, 97 and 107 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court placed undue weight on the relevance of the periodic reviews of the restrictive measures. According to the appellant, the listing of her name was unduly extended on several occasions …","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"64       Lastly, the appellant submits that, in paragraphs 98, 99, 105 and 106 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court put undue weight on the possibilities of requesting authorisation to use frozen funds or to obtain a travel permit on humanitarian grounds, whereas the restrictive measures to which she is subject have materially undermined the essence of her fundamental rights by depriving her of the possibility of taking care of her grandchildren in Switzerland.","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"65       The Council disputes the merits of the appellant’s arguments.","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"66       By the first part of her third ground of appeal, the appellant submits, in essence, that the General Court erred in law by holding, in paragraphs 111, 114 to 116 and 118 to 120 of the judgment under appeal, that the criterion of association did not confer excessive discretion on the Council and thus observed the principle of legal certainty.","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"67       In that regard, it must be held that the General Court correctly applied the case-law relating to the principle of legal certainty, referred to in paragraph 38 of the present judgment and in paragraphs 113 and 115 of the judgment under appeal, by ruling, in paragraphs 114 and 115 of the lat …","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"68       The General Court also did not err in law by ruling, in paragraphs 116 and 118 to 120 of the judgment under appeal, that, in the present case, the criterion of association observes the principle of legal certainty because it forms part of a legal framework clearly delimited by the objectives pursued by the legislation governing restrictive measures against the Russian Federation, namely the risk of circumvention which that criterion seeks to combat.","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"69       In that regard, it should be noted that the appellant does not dispute the fact, noted by the General Court in paragraph 117 of the judgment under appeal, that the criterion of association is subject, in her case, to the ‘substantive criterion relating to leading businesspersons’, namely th …","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"70       It is in that context that the General Court, in essence and correctly, recalled in paragraph 118 of the judgment under appeal that, as a criterion subject to a substantive criterion, the criterion of association is intended to prevent or preclude the non-negligible risk that a person subje …","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"71       Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that it is neither necessary to ascertain whether the risk of circumvention is established in each individual case (see, to that effect, judgment of 25 June 2020, VTB Bank v Council , C‑729/18 P, EU:C:2020:499, paragraph 66), nor whether the associate …","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"72       Lastly, the General Court correctly pointed out, in paragraph 111 of the judgment under appeal, that, although the Council cannot adopt restrictive measures against persons who do not satisfy the criteria on the basis of which such measures are imposed, it has a broad discretion enabling it …","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"73       In the second part of her third ground of appeal, the appellant, first, criticises the General Court for refusing to find that the restrictive measures adopted against her and her husband were not appropriate for attaining the objectives pursued, namely, as is apparent from paragraph 104 of the judgment under appeal, bringing pressure to bear on Russian decision-makers responsible for the situation in Ukraine.","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"74       As a preliminary point, it must be noted that, as is apparent from the appellant’s arguments summarised in paragraph 86 of the judgment under appeal, she had merely argued that the imposition of restrictive measures on her, and not her husband, did not serve to achieve the objectives of Reg …","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"75       With the benefit of that preliminary observation, it must be borne in mind that, in order to determine whether the restrictive measures enacted by the European Union comply with the principle of proportionality or whether the interference with the rights or freedoms guaranteed by the Charte …","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"76       In the present case, suffice it to note that the General Court, in paragraphs 102 and 103 of the judgment under appeal, did examine whether the restrictive measures adopted against the appellant were appropriate. In that regard, given that, as has been stated in paragraphs 70 and 71 of the …","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"77       As regards, second, the argument that the General Court, in paragraph 104 of the judgment under appeal, incorrectly required the appellant to propose less restrictive measures than those provided for by the restrictive measures, that argument is unfounded. In that paragraph, the General Cou …","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"78       As regards, third, the argument that the General Court, in paragraphs 96 to 99 and paragraphs 105 to 107 of the judgment under appeal, placed undue weight on the relevance of the periodic reviews of the restrictive measures and the possibilities of requesting authorisation to use the funds …","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"79       In so far as the appellant claims that the listing of her name was unduly extended on several occasions, that the periodic reviews were carried out in part without proper diligence, and that the Council subsequently amended the (g) criterion and the criterion of association in order to conf …","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"80       In the light of the foregoing, the third ground of appeal must be rejected and, accordingly, the appeal dismissed in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"Costs","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"81       Pursuant to Article 184(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, where the appeal is unfounded, the Court is to make a decision as to the costs. Under Article 138(1) of those Rules of Procedure, applicable to appeal proceedings by virtue of Article 184(1) thereof, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings.","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"82       Since the Council has applied for costs and the appellant has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council.","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby:","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"1.       Dismisses the appeal;","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"2.       Orders Ms Galina Evgenyevna Pumpyanskaya to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"Smulders","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"Arastey Sahún","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"Passer","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 15 October 2026.","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"V. Di Bucci","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"B. Smulders","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"Registrar","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"President of the Chamber","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"*       Language of the case: English.","paragraph_id":"para_141"}],"operative_part":"On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby:\n\n1.       Dismisses the appeal;\n\n2.       Orders Ms Galina Evgenyevna Pumpyanskaya to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.","word_count":8822,"cites":["C-695/23","T-272/22","C-696/23","C-704/23","C-711/23","C-35/24","C-111/24","T-212/22","C-330/15","T-577/12","C-703/23","T-270/22","C-112/23","C-729/18"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"43cb470e4f7567884dc2264de951db9a7dbdc53c3fdc947f9ccaea04e07dc0ac","source_url":"https://publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/62023CJ0695","fetched_at":"2026-10-15T15:46:24.79+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/eu/c-695-23-p","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-695-23-p","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-695-23-p","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-695-23-p","verification":{"stored_sha256":"43cb470e4f7567884dc2264de951db9a7dbdc53c3fdc947f9ccaea04e07dc0ac","recomputed_sha256":"43cb470e4f7567884dc2264de951db9a7dbdc53c3fdc947f9ccaea04e07dc0ac","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-15T21:34:52.636Z"}},"hash":"sha256:e619b48e0260fa7977e94fb267242953cbf5db56bbcec4787f4391154b715fea","version":"legal-2026-10-15","expires":"2026-10-16T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-15+legal-2026-10-15+2026-10-15T21:23:53","content_hash":"sha256:e619b48e0260fa7977e94fb267242953cbf5db56bbcec4787f4391154b715fea","revalidate_after":"2026-10-15T22:34:53.288Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-695-23-p","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-695-23-p"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-695-23-p"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-695-23-p"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=eu"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-695-23-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-0bbcc36f14c5cd660ec2bfa2b08e0180","response_hash":"sha256:e619b48e0260fa7977e94fb267242953cbf5db56bbcec4787f4391154b715fea"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T05:22:37.177Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu%3Ac-695-23-p&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":12175}}