## Facts

- The case arose from UN Security Council resolutions designed to combat terrorism by mandating asset freezes against persons and entities suspected of financing Al-Qaeda.
- The Council of the European Union enacted regulations implementing these UN resolutions, directly impacting Mr. Kadi and Al Barakaat International Relief Group.
- These EU regulations required the freezing of assets of designated individuals and entities without providing reasons or opportunities for effective judicial review.
- Mr. Kadi and Al Barakaat challenged these measures, claiming violations of their rights to property, fair hearing, and judicial protection.

## Issues

1. Whether EU regulations implementing binding UN Security Council resolutions could be reviewed for compliance with fundamental rights protected by EU law.
2. Whether the asset freezing measures imposed in compliance with Security Council mandates violated the applicants’ fundamental rights under the EU legal framework.
3. Whether international obligations under the UN Charter could override the constitutional principles and fundamental rights guaranteed by the EU.

## Decision

- The European Court of Justice overturned the Court of First Instance’s dismissal of the claims.
- The ECJ ruled that although the EU must respect UN Security Council resolutions, such obligations cannot supersede the EU’s own constitutional framework or its protection of fundamental rights.
- The Court held that fundamental rights form an essential part of EU law, requiring observance by all EU institutions, even when implementing international obligations.
- The Court determined that EU measures implementing international commitments, including asset freezes, must be subject to judicial review to ensure compliance with EU fundamental rights.

## Legal Principles

- Fundamental rights are essential general principles of EU law and must be observed when the EU implements international obligations.
- The ECJ is the ultimate authority for reviewing the legality of EU acts vis-à-vis fundamental rights, including those arising from international undertakings.
- The primacy of fundamental rights prevails over conflicting international obligations within the EU legal order.
- The unique nature of the EU legal system, specifically the doctrines of direct effect and supremacy, distinguishes it from traditional international law approaches.

## Conclusion

The ECJ’s judgment in Kadi and Al Barakaat firmly established that EU fundamental rights cannot be overridden by international obligations, ensuring that measures taken under UN Security Council resolutions must conform to the EU’s constitutional standards of rights protection.

Kadi and Al Barakaat International Fdn. v Council and Commission (Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P) [2008] ECR I-6351, ECLI:EU:C:2008:461