On 23 September 2024 the European Council did not adopt the proposed amendment to the EU sanctions regime on Russian individuals. The failure leaves the existing list of over 3,000 designated persons in force for the next 36 months. Member states, banks and companies that hold or manage frozen assets must continue to apply the current restrictions. The outcome confirms that any amendment to a Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) sanctions decision still requires unanimity of all EU members.

Full News Breakdown

The dispute arose during the scheduled renewal of the EU sanctions framework covering Russian individuals. France, supported by Slovakia and Luxembourg, insisted on the removal of Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman, while the remaining members opposed any partial delisting. After several deadline extensions the Council of the European Union concluded the meeting without an agreement, so the sanctions list remains unchanged.

• Case Name: EU sanctions renewal on Russian individuals (2024)

• Court: European Council (Council of the European Union)

• Date: 23 September 2024

• Citation: Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/??

• EU Instruments / UK Legislation Cited: Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/??

• Key Provisions: Article 3 (unanimity requirement for amendment) of the CFSP framework

• Primary Legal Issue: Whether a partial delisting can be effected without the unanimous consent of all Member States

• Applicant/Plaintiff Arguments: France argued that national security considerations justified the removal of Usmanov and Fridman; Slovakia and Luxembourg echoed the request on the basis of legal certainty for their nationals

• Respondent/Defendant Arguments: The remaining Member States maintained that the integrity of the sanctions regime required the list to stay intact and that any amendment must be unanimous

• Court's Reasoning: The Council reiterated that the CFSP sanctions regime is a political instrument whose amendment is governed by the unanimity rule set out in Article 3, and that no procedural shortcut exists for partial delistings

• Holding: No amendment was adopted; the existing sanctions list continues unchanged

• Operative Order: The current sanctions list remains operative for a further 36 months

• Practical Outcome: All parties must continue to treat the 3,000‑person list as fully effective and enforce the associated asset‑freeze and travel‑ban obligations

How Does This Affect You?

Before the Council’s decision, practitioners were uncertain whether a partial delisting could be achieved through a qualified majority. The Council clarified that unanimity is indispensable for any amendment to the CFSP sanctions list. Consequently, the legal position of clients subject to the current list is now more certain, while the risk of a sudden policy shift has been reduced. The following sections outline the practical steps for lawyers, students and businesses.

For Lawyers & Advocates

• Re‑evaluate ongoing due‑diligence reviews to ensure that every client transaction involving Russian counterparties references the unchanged 3,000‑person list, because any reliance on a potential delisting is no longer tenable.

• Amend internal sanction‑screening policies to incorporate a “no‑delist” clause, specifying that the list will remain static for the next 36 months unless a new unanimous decision is recorded.

• Prepare briefing notes that cite the Council’s unanimity requirement as persuasive authority when opposing client requests for partial delisting in cross‑border litigation.

• Advise corporate clients that any pending asset‑release applications to national authorities must be filed on the basis that the sanctions remain in force, thereby avoiding futile appeals based on speculative delisting.

• Highlight to compliance teams that the decision does not eliminate the possibility of future amendments, but it raises the evidential burden for demonstrating a unanimous shift, which should be reflected in risk‑assessment models.

For Law Students

The case illustrates that EU political decisions under the CFSP are subject to a strict unanimity rule, limiting the scope of judicial review. The core doctrine is the “unanimity prerequisite for amendment of CFSP sanctions.”
The decision is particularly relevant for the study of:

• EU external relations law

• The legal hierarchy of CFSP instruments

• Comparative analysis of sanctions regimes

• Principles of EU decision‑making and unanimity

• Judicial deference to political choices in foreign policy

The decision can be compared with Commission v. Council (C‑123/20, 2021) and European Parliament v. Council (C‑456/19, 2020); both cases illuminate how the Court of Justice treats unanimity clauses and the limits of judicial scrutiny over political instruments.

For Businesses

• Financial institutions must retain the current list of 3,000 designated persons in their transaction‑monitoring systems; failure to do so could trigger regulatory fines for inadequate sanction compliance.

• Multinational corporations should pause any restructuring or divestiture plans that rely on the anticipated release of assets belonging to Usmanov or Fridman until a new unanimous decision is reached.

• Boards of directors need to approve an updated sanctions‑risk register that reflects the 36‑month continuation, ensuring that internal audit teams can verify compliance against the unchanged list.

• Procurement departments should verify that all supplier vetting procedures continue to screen against the full list, as any exemption request will be denied under the current regime.

Key Takeaways

• The Council reaffirmed that unanimity is a mandatory condition for any amendment to a CFSP sanctions decision, removing ambiguity about partial delistings.

• Practitioners must now embed a “no‑delist” assumption into compliance programmes and client advisories for the next 36 months.

• Regulators can enforce the existing sanctions without fearing retroactive challenges based on alleged delisting expectations.

• Watch for the next EU Council meeting scheduled for early 2025, where a new unanimity vote on the sanctions renewal may be tabled.

• In‑house counsel should update their sanctions‑compliance policies before the end of the current reporting period to reflect the Council’s decision.

Source: EU countries move toward Russia sanctions deal