65The aforementioned difficulties in interpreting the provisions in question have necessarily given rise to considerable difficulties in giving them effect, as shown by the copious case-law of the General Court on cases of this particular kind (see, in addition to Sison I and Sison II, paragraph 1 above, Case T-228/02 Organisation des Modjahedines du peuple d’Iran v Council [2006] ECR II-4665, (‘OMPI’); the judgment of 11 July 2007 in Case T-327/03 Al-Aqsa v Council (not published in the ECR, ‘Al-Aqsa I’); PMOI I, paragraph 48 above; Case T-284/08 People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran v Council [2008] ECR II-3487 (‘PMOI II’), at present under appeal in Case C-27/09 P; the judgment of 2 September 2009 in Joined Cases T-37/07 and T-323/07 El Morabit v Council (not published in the ECR); Case T-348/07 Al-Aqsa v Council [2010] ECR II-4575 (‘Al-Aqsa II’); and Case T-49/07 Fahas v Council [2010] ECR II-5555). It is thus only through its consideration of some 10 cases, spread over several years, that the Court has by degrees constructed a rational, consistent framework for the interpretation of the provisions at issue. This process of gradual development of the case-law is especially apparent from paragraph 91 et seq. of Sison II, paragraph 1 above, which summarise the earlier judgments in this sphere.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.