# C_2023338EN.01003101.xml

| 25.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/31

---

Action brought on 7 July 2023 — Raiffeisen Bank International v SRB

(Case T-389/23)

(2023/C 338/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Raiffeisen Bank International AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: G. Wilfling)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the defendant of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23); in the alternative |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the defendant of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23); in the alternative

| — | annul the decision of the defendant of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23), in so far as it concerns the applicant Raiffeisen Bank International AG; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the defendant of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23), in so far as it concerns the applicant Raiffeisen Bank International AG; and

| — | 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 applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (1)

  The aggregate contribution calculated annually from individual contributions of the institutions authorised in the territories of all of the participating Member States may not exceed 12,5 % of the target level in any year in the initial period. The defendant has thereby infringed Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014, by failing to observe that absolute limit in determining the annual target level. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (1)

The aggregate contribution calculated annually from individual contributions of the institutions authorised in the territories of all of the participating Member States may not exceed 12,5 % of the target level in any year in the initial period. The defendant has thereby infringed Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014, by failing to observe that absolute limit in determining the annual target level.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 69(1) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
  The applicant disputes that the amount of the target level was correctly determined. Even if the view of the defendant were followed and a dynamic policy chosen, the wording of the legislation does not leave room to link the calculation of the contributions for 2023 to 2024 values and accordingly a time period outside the initial period. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 69(1) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014

The applicant disputes that the amount of the target level was correctly determined. Even if the view of the defendant were followed and a dynamic policy chosen, the wording of the legislation does not leave room to link the calculation of the contributions for 2023 to 2024 values and accordingly a time period outside the initial period.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 296 TFEU and Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) due to a failure to state adequate reasons for the decision
  The requirements for an adequate statement of reasons for an act of individual application in accordance with case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (3) are not met in the present decision. The individual contributions are calculated pro-rata to the amount of the liabilities less covered deposits of an institution with respect to the aggregate liabilities less covered deposits of all the institutions concerned. The statement of reasons for the decision does not contain detailed information concerning the data of the other institutions.
  The details of the calculations concerning the applicant, relied, in essence, on information, which the applicant had reported using the SRB data template. That further included how many classes it gives for each factor and the classes into which they fall. All the information, which was provided by the statement of reasons, was only sufficient to precisely determine the accuracy of the calculation of the applicant’s contribution up to a certain point. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 296 TFEU and Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) due to a failure to state adequate reasons for the decision

The requirements for an adequate statement of reasons for an act of individual application in accordance with case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (3) are not met in the present decision. The individual contributions are calculated pro-rata to the amount of the liabilities less covered deposits of an institution with respect to the aggregate liabilities less covered deposits of all the institutions concerned. The statement of reasons for the decision does not contain detailed information concerning the data of the other institutions.

The details of the calculations concerning the applicant, relied, in essence, on information, which the applicant had reported using the SRB data template. That further included how many classes it gives for each factor and the classes into which they fall. All the information, which was provided by the statement of reasons, was only sufficient to precisely determine the accuracy of the calculation of the applicant’s contribution up to a certain point.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 47 of the Charter and the principle of legal certainty due to the fact that the decision is not subject to review
  On the basis of the information provided in the decision and the annexes thereto, the applicant is not able to determine the accuracy of the calculation of its contribution to the Single Resolution Fund. Considering that the decision refers to a contribution in the (mid) tens of millions for the applicant, that is unequivocally incompatible with principles of the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 47 of the Charter and the principle of legal certainty due to the fact that the decision is not subject to review

On the basis of the information provided in the decision and the annexes thereto, the applicant is not able to determine the accuracy of the calculation of its contribution to the Single Resolution Fund. Considering that the decision refers to a contribution in the (mid) tens of millions for the applicant, that is unequivocally incompatible with principles of the rule of law.

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

(2)  
  OJ 2012, C 326, p. 391.

(3)  Judgment of 15 July 2021, Commission v Landesbank Baden-Württemberg and SRB, C-584/20 P and C-621/20 P, EU:C:2021:601.

---