Nice as Pye – EU sanctions and the right of reply
Targeted European Union sanctions against states and individuals accused of committing serious human rights abuses continue to prolifeate - most recently in response to the political upheaval in North Africa and the Middle East. As they do, so too do attempts by those subjected to these ‘restrictive measures’ to challenge their scope and application in the courts. Ross Dixon and Nicholas Querée of Hickman & Rose consider the case of Pye Phyo Tay Za of Burma.
On 29 November 2011 Advocate General Mengozzi delivered his opinion on Pye Phyo Tay Za v Council of the European Union [2011] Case C-376/10 P. If followed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), his finding will add to a growing body of case law limiting the application of these restrictions, importing procedural safeguards that those subject to these measures may be able to employ to challenge the freezing of their assets.
Forgotten password?
if you have a subscription to moneylaunderingbulletin.com, but have forgotten your password, please fill in the box below and your log-in details will be emailed to you.Request a free trial
You can request a free trial to Money Laundering Bulletin. This includes your personal copy of the latest issue.Click here to request a free trial.Subscribe now
Start benefiting from our expert analysis straight away. Click here to subscribe. A subscription provides the latest hardcopy sent to you ten times a year, access to our online archive, and full access to the site.Log in
Ross Dixon (+44 (0)20 7702 5355, rdixon@hickmanandrose.co.uk) is a partner and Nicholas Querée (+44 (0)20 7702 5360, nqueree@hickmanandrose.co.uk) a paralegal at Hickman & Rose.
Jan 25 2012
