lya Scherbovich, founder and head of the Russian financial investment group United Capital Partners (UCP), has initiated legal proceedings against the Council of the European Union, challenging the sanctions imposed on him in April 2026. The action was registered with the EU General Court on 3 July 2026 as Case T-418/26.
The applicant, born 23 December 1974 in the Russian Federation, seeks the annulment of two key legal acts: Council Decision (CFSP) 2026/504 of 23 April 2026 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/509 of 23 April 2026. Both acts amended the existing sanctions framework concerning actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence of Ukraine.
Why Scherbovich Was Sanctioned
The Council of the European Union added Scherbovich to its sanctions list on 23 April 2026 based on his activities in Russia’s energy sector. According to official EU documentation, Scherbovich is the founder and head of United Capital Partners Investment Group, a large Russian financial investment group with investments in oil and gas production and processing.
The official reasoning states that, together with the Russian state-owned oil company Rosneft, United Capital Partners Investment Group holds a significant share in an Indian company operating an oil refinery that is subject to EU restrictive measures. This Indian enterprise is described as one of the major refiners of Russian crude oil.
The EU concluded that the energy sector, particularly the oil industry, provides a substantial source of revenue to the Russian government. Therefore, Scherbovich was deemed to be “active in an economic sector that provides a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation, which is responsible for the annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of Ukraine”.
Grounds for the Challenge
Scherbovich’s application to the General Court advances four pleas in law, arguing that the Council’s decision was procedurally and substantively flawed .
-
Inadequate statement of reasons: The applicant contends that the Council infringed its obligation to provide a proper statement of reasons under Articles 296 TFEU and 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. He argues that the reasoning provided is “unclear, vague, generic and, in any event, insufficiently substantiated” .
-
Error of assessment: Scherbovich claims the Council made an error of assessment, failed to discharge the burden of proof, and breached the listing criteria set forth in the relevant legal provisions. He asserts that the factual basis for his designation is “inaccurate and incomplete” and that the evidence relied upon is “outdated and unreliable”.
-
Breach of essential procedural requirements: The application alleges violations of Article 16(2) TEU and Article 19(2) third sentence of the Council’s Rules of Procedure, along with a breach of the right to good administration.
-
Breach of proportionality and fundamental rights: The fourth plea contends that the sanctions violate the principle of proportionality under Article 5(4) TEU. Scherbovich argues that the Council failed to assess whether the restrictive measures remain “appropriate, necessary and proportionate” to their objectives, and that the measures infringe his fundamental rights under Articles 16 and 17 of the Charter.
