# C_2018427EN.01007901.xml

| 26.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/79 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/79

---

Action brought on 29 August 2018 — Del Valle Ruiz and Others V SRB

(Case T-514/18)

(2018/C 427/106)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Antonio Del Valle Ruiz (Mexico City, Mexico) and 36 others (represented by: P. Saini, QC, J. Pobjoy, Barrister and R. Boynton, Solicitor)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

| — | annul the final decision of the SRB Appeal Panel in Case 48/2017, dated 19 June 2018, insofar as the latter held that the Single Resolution Board (SRB) was entitled to rely upon (i) Article 4(1)(a), fourth indent; (ii) Article 4(2), first indent; (iii) Article 4(2), third indent; and/or (iv) Article 4(3) of Regulation No. 1049/2001 (1) (and/or the equivalent provisions under SRB Decision SRB/ES/2017/01 of 9 February 2017 on public access to SRB documents), in order to justify non-disclosure of the documents requested by the applicants in their confirmatory application dated 23 August 2017 concerning the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the final decision of the SRB Appeal Panel in Case 48/2017, dated 19 June 2018, insofar as the latter held that the Single Resolution Board (SRB) was entitled to rely upon (i) Article 4(1)(a), fourth indent; (ii) Article 4(2), first indent; (iii) Article 4(2), third indent; and/or (iv) Article 4(3) of Regulation No. 1049/2001 (1) (and/or the equivalent provisions under SRB Decision SRB/ES/2017/01 of 9 February 2017 on public access to SRB documents), in order to justify non-disclosure of the documents requested by the applicants in their confirmatory application dated 23 August 2017 concerning the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on six pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel has infringed the fourth indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No. 1049/2001. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel has infringed the fourth indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No. 1049/2001.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed the first indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No. 1049/2001. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed the first indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No. 1049/2001.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 4(3) of Regulation No. 1049/2001. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 4(3) of Regulation No. 1049/2001.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed the third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No. 1049/2001. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed the third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No. 1049/2001.

| 5. | Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 4(6) of Regulation No. 1049/2001 |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 4(6) of Regulation No. 1049/2001

| 6. | Sixth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 11 of Regulation No. 1049/2001. |
| --- | --- |

6.

Sixth plea in law, alleging that the Appeal Panel has infringed Article 11 of Regulation No. 1049/2001.

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

---