The European Union’s highest court has confirmed that EuroChem is not subject to the restrictive measures imposed on its founder, Mr Andrey Melnichenko.

In 2022, the European Union imposed restrictive measures against EuroChem’s founder, Mr Andrey Melnichenko, under Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014. The EU justified the listing by claiming that Mr Melnichenko owns EuroChem. The listing, the opaque rules of the Regulation, and lack of clear guidance from the EU have caused certain EU operators, national competent authorities of the EU Member States, and even courts in third countries to consider EuroChem and its assets frozen.

Mr Melnichenko launched proceedings for the annulment of his listings, which have now reached the EU’s highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Linetrust PTC Ltd as trustee of Firstline Trust, the ultimate holding structure of EuroChem, has applied to intervene in the proceedings.

On 29 October 2025, the President of the CJEU, after hearing the Advocate General, ruled that “the funds and economic resources of Linetrust and [Firstline Trust] were not frozen by the acts at issue or by other EU acts, unlike those of Mr Melnichenko”.

EuroChem is an indirect subsidiary of Linetrust PTC. It necessarily follows that EuroChem, its funds and economic resources are similarly not frozen.

The CJEU’s order will likely prompt a reassessment of the approach taken by certain national competent authorities and courts of EU Member States and third countries regarding the mechanism and scope of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.

EuroChem welcomes the CJEU’s confirmation and urges all business partners, financial institutions, and national competent authorities to take the decision into account when assessing EuroChem’s counterparty risk and handling its operations.

It follows from the General Court’s earlier confirmation that:

• The mere mention of EuroChem in the grounds for Mr. Melnichenko’s designation does not impose any obligation on third parties regarding their dealings with EuroChem;
• EuroChem is not targeted by the EU and is not exposed to measures targeting Mr. Melnichenko; and
• Termination of business relations with a company solely because its name appears in such grounds should not automatically be considered an act made “in good faith”.

EuroChem reiterates that its counterparties should conduct their own independent assessment of its status, taking into account the clear findings of the EU courts regarding both EuroChem and its parent structures.