header-logo header-logo

EU

27 September 2013
Issue: 7577 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Europäisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG v Council of the European Union T-434/11, [2013] All ER (D) 126 (Sep)

Articles 20(1)(b) of Art 20(1)(b) of Council Decision (CFSP) 2010/413 (concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP) and reg 23(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EU) 267/2012 (concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010) required the cuncil to freeze the funds and economic resources of an entity that had assisted a listed person, entity or body to evade or violate the provisions of those acts or the UNSC Resolutions. The council would assess case-by-case whether the entity in question had provided such assistance to a designated person, entity or body. Further, the council was required to make a case-by-case assessment in order to determine whether such assistance had been provided; and (ii) non-designated credit and financial institutions had to exercise vigilance and, therefore, fully satisfy themselves as to compliance with the restrictive measures taken against designated entities.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll