Council of the European Union v Plahotniuc

On 12 November 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down its judgment dismissing the appeal brought by the Council of the European Union, seeking to challenge the 23 October 2024 decision of the General Court (see separate post here).

The General Court had upheld Mr Plahtoniuc’s claim that his right to a fair trial was violated by the Council’s failure to verify whether the Moldovan criminal investigations and proceedings, used as the basis for the listing, observed Mr Plahotniuc’s fundamental rights. The listing was based solely on decisions by the Moldovan authorities, and the Council failed to discharge its “verification obligation”, regarding applicant’s rights of defence and right to effective judicial protection, considering the submitted irregularities in the Moldovan proceedings.

The Council appealed that judgment, and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy intervened to support the Council in the appeal.

The appeal was dismissed in full. The Court’s key conclusions are summarised at §§63-65:

"63. In the present case, as the General Court found in paragraphs 50 and 51 of the judgment under appeal, it is neither disputed nor open to dispute that the Council failed to show, in the grounds for the listing at issue, that it had verified that the prosecutions referred to in those grounds had been conducted in accordance with Mr Plahotniuc’s rights of the defence and right to effective judicial protection, and, a fortiori, that it had failed to disclose the outcome of those verifications in the acts at issue.

64. In those circumstances, the General Court did not err in law in finding, in paragraph 52 of the judgment under appeal, that the Council had failed to fulfil its obligation to state reasons as regards the two elements which could be taken into consideration in order to assess whether the acts at issue were well founded, namely the existence, first, of criminal proceedings in Moldova for crimes in connection with the embezzlement of State funds and their illegal export and, secondly, of criminal investigations and prosecutions in the ‘Bank Fraud’ case and for ‘bribing the former president of the Republic of Moldova’.

65. In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the General Court observed the principles, stemming from the case-law cited in paragraphs 46 and 53 above, relating to the review of the legality of the grounds on which the acts at issue are based. Accordingly, the General Court did not err in law in holding, in paragraphs 52 and 55 of the judgment under appeal, that the Council had not fulfilled its obligation to state the reasons underpinning the grounds for the listing at issue and did not err in law in annulling the acts at issue."

A copy of the judgment is available here.

Mr Plahotniuc was represented by Jason Pobjoy KC in both the General Court and Court of Justice of the European Union. Jason Pobjoy KC has extensive expertise in challenging and advising on EU, domestic and international sanctions, and has appeared in many of the leading domestic and EU cases over the past 10 years.