Opera Laboratori Fiorentini (Common Foreign and Security Policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine - Judgment) [2026] EUECJ C-313/24 (12 February 2026)

Executive summary

The Court gave a preliminary ruling on Article 5k(1)(c) of Regulation No 833/2014, in a dispute over an Italian public contract awarded to Scudieri International for services at the Uffizi Gallery. The case turned on whether a company with Russian nationals on its board, including one who was also sole administrator of its parent company, could be treated as acting "on behalf or at the direction" of a Russian-linked entity for sanctions purposes.

Key points

• Parties: Opera Laboratori Fiorentini challenged an Italian Ministry of Culture/Uffizi Gallery award to Scudieri International; A.L.E.S. and Scudieri International were joined in the proceedings.
• Issue: whether Article 5k(1)(c) of Regulation 833/2014 barred the award/continuation of a public contract to a company allegedly acting on behalf of or at the direction of a Russian-linked person or entity.
• Sanctions context: the provision is part of EU restrictive measures adopted in response to Russia’s actions destabilising Ukraine, and specifically extends to certain public procurement and concessions.
• Reasoning context in the text: the judgment records that the relevant EU rules prohibit public contracts with Russian nationals, Russia-established entities, majority Russian-owned entities, and persons acting on their behalf or at their direction.
• The text also notes a 2025 amendment narrowing Article 5k(c) to persons acting on behalf or at the direction of a natural or legal person referred to in points (a) or (b).

Why it matters

This is directly relevant to EU sanctions screening in procurement: it shows that ownership, board composition, and control-like relationships can trigger Article 5k issues even where the bidder is incorporated under EU law. It also matters for geopolitical risk because it sits at the intersection of Russian sanctions, public contracting, and circumvention concerns.

Implications

For compliance teams and contracting authorities, the judgment reinforces the need to assess not only formal incorporation and shareholding, but also who sits on the board and whether the bidder may be acting for a Russian national or Russia-linked entity. For litigation strategy, challengers can use Article 5k to attack awards where control or direction appears indirect, while awardees need a documented sanctions review showing why the prohibition does not apply.