Challenging EU and UK sanctions designations

EU: notification, observations and review

Regulation 269/2014 shows the pattern used in EU listing regulations. When the Council lists a person, it communicates the decision and the grounds, directly if the address is known or through a published notice ¹. The person is given an opportunity to present observations ¹. If observations or substantial new evidence are presented, the Council reviews its decision and informs the person ¹. The list in Annex I is reviewed at regular intervals, at least every 12 months ¹.

EU: going to court

The EU Treaties exclude most foreign and security policy acts from the Court's reach. Article 275 TFEU keeps jurisdiction over the legality of decisions providing for restrictive measures against natural or legal persons ³. Such cases follow Article 263, which lets any natural or legal person challenge an act addressed to them or of direct and individual concern ². Proceedings must start within two months of publication of the measure or its notification ².

The Court of Justice set the standard of review in its judgment of 18 July 2013 in Joined Cases C-584/10 P, C-593/10 P and C-595/10 P ⁴. It held that the EU authority must disclose to the listed person at least the summary of reasons from the UN Sanctions Committee ⁴. It held that the authority bears the burden of showing the reasons are well founded, and the listed person does not have to prove a negative ⁴. A decision is annulled only if none of the stated reasons is detailed, specific and substantiated enough to support it on its own ⁴. The Court dismissed the appeals of the Commission, the Council and the United Kingdom ⁴.

UK: asking the minister

Section 23 lets the designated person request variation or revocation at any time during the life of the designation ⁵. The minister must decide to vary, revoke or take no action ⁵. A further request is barred if it does not rest on a significant matter not considered before ⁵.

The FCDO guidance asks for the Sanctions Review Request Form, sent to sanctions.reassessment@fcdo.gov.uk or by post to the Sanctions Unit ⁸. It asks for proof of identity, written authority for representatives and certified translations of evidence not in English ⁸. The FCDO decides as soon as reasonably practicable and says exact timelines cannot be given ⁸. Reasons are given in writing, with some matters withheld on grounds such as national security ⁸.

Section 24, which provided for periodic review of certain designations, was omitted on 15 March 2022 by the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022 ⁷.

UK: court review

Under section 38, the person can apply to the High Court, or the Court of Session in Scotland, to set aside the decision ⁶. The court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial review ⁶.

The Supreme Court ruled on the standard in 2025 UKSC 30 ⁹. The press summary, dated 29 July 2025, says the majority dismissed an individual's appeal against an asset freeze ⁹. It says the court must decide for itself whether Convention rights were violated, but ministers receive a wide margin of appreciation in national security and foreign affairs ⁹. Lord Leggatt dissented and described the freeze as oppressive, unjust and disproportionate ⁹.

Side by side