CJEU Delivery of judgment: Inter Rao Lietuva
Why it matters
Inter Rao Lietuva was never on the EU sanctions list: Lithuania froze its funds nationally in 2022 as an entity said to be controlled by the President of Russia, who is listed. The question referred by Lithuania’s Supreme Administrative Court is therefore how much evidence a member state needs before extending an EU freeze to a company that is only indirectly linked to a designated person. The answer sets the enforcement standard for the hardest and most common sanctions cases across all 27 member states, and leaves the Council’s own designation power untouched.
What to watch
- Whether the Court accepts that a member state may freeze the assets of an entity that is not itself EU-listed.
- What evidence of control the Court requires before such a national freeze holds.
- Whether national enforcement authorities in other member states narrow existing indirect-link freezes in response.
- Whether the Council responds by listing affected entities directly instead of relying on national measures.
- Case context: preliminary reference from the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania; Court of Justice - Fifth Chamber; Advocate General - Campos Sanchez-Bordona.
Outcome
The Court ruled for Inter Rao Lietuva. Lithuania froze the company's funds in 2022 as an entity said to be controlled by the President of Russia, though the company was never itself on the EU sanctions list. The Court held that the autocratic nature of Russia's political regime is not, in itself, sufficiently solid evidence that its President controls a given company: control must rest on objective and sufficiently solid evidence. National authorities keep the power to freeze entities that are not EU-listed, but must now meet that evidentiary standard to do it. The Council's own designation power is untouched.
Sources
Open in the calendar
Open this event in the live GeoVeu calendar, alongside everything scheduled around it.