# C_2020423EN.01002502.xml

| 7.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/25

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de A Coruña (Spain) lodged on 2 September 2020 — Banco Santander, SA v J.A.C. and M.C.P.R.

(Case C-410/20)

(2020/C 423/38)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de A Coruña

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Banco Santander, SA

Defendants: J.A.C. and M.C.P.R.

Questions referred

| 1. | Where, in the course of a procedure for the resolution of a financial institution, all of the shares into which the share capital was divided have been redeemed, must Articles 34(1)(a), 53(1) and (3) and 60(2)(b) and (e) of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 (1) be interpreted as meaning that they preclude persons having acquired their shares a number of months prior to the start of the resolution procedure, on the occasion of a capital increase with a public offer to subscribe, from bringing claims for compensation or claims having equivalent effect which are based on defective information in the issue prospectus against the issuing institution or against the institution emerging from a subsequent merger by acquisition? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Where, in the course of a procedure for the resolution of a financial institution, all of the shares into which the share capital was divided have been redeemed, must Articles 34(1)(a), 53(1) and (3) and 60(2)(b) and (e) of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 (1) be interpreted as meaning that they preclude persons having acquired their shares a number of months prior to the start of the resolution procedure, on the occasion of a capital increase with a public offer to subscribe, from bringing claims for compensation or claims having equivalent effect which are based on defective information in the issue prospectus against the issuing institution or against the institution emerging from a subsequent merger by acquisition?

| 2. | In the same situation as that referred to in the previous question, do Articles 34(1)(a), 53(3) and 60(2)(b) of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 preclude the courts from imposing on the issuing institution or on the institution that succeeds to it universally any obligations to reimburse the equivalent value of the shares subscribed and to pay interest as a result of the retroactively effective (ex tunc) declaration as to the nullity of the share subscription contract, pursuant to claims brought after the institution has been resolved? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the same situation as that referred to in the previous question, do Articles 34(1)(a), 53(3) and 60(2)(b) of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 preclude the courts from imposing on the issuing institution or on the institution that succeeds to it universally any obligations to reimburse the equivalent value of the shares subscribed and to pay interest as a result of the retroactively effective (ex tunc) declaration as to the nullity of the share subscription contract, pursuant to claims brought after the institution has been resolved?

---

(1)  Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 190).

---