Information;Order — ECLI:EU:T:2022:331
Date: 2022-06-01
Language of the case: Spanish
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Economic and monetary policy
Procedure: Action for annulment - inadmissible

Action brought on 18 July 2019 — Del Valle Ruiz and Others v SRB (Case T-512/19) Language of the case: Spanish Parties Applicants: Antonio Del Valle Ruiz (Mexico City, Mexico) and 36 other applicants (represented by: P. Rubio Escobar and B. Fernández García, lawyers) Defendant: Single Resolution Board Form of order sought The applicants claim that the General Court should: annul the Decision (SRB/CM01/ARES (2018) 3664981) of the Single Resolution Board of 20 May 2019 agreeing not to draw up the definitive valuation report provided for in Article 20.11 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 in the context of the resolution of Banco Popular and, consequently, order the Single Resolution Board to draw up that definitive valuation report in accordance with the applicable legislation; additionally, in accordance with Articles 133 and 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, order the defendant and the parties intervening in full or partial support of the form of order sought by it to pay the costs. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of their action, the applicants invoke five pleas in law. First plea, alleging failure to state or failure sufficiently to state the reasons on which the measure is based and, consequently, infringement of Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). Second plea, alleging infringement of Article 20.11 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014, 1 in so far as the defendant states that the definitive valuation report on Banco Popular provided for in that provision will not be drawn up. Third plea, alleging infringement of the principle of sound administration provided for under Article 41 of the Charter, in so far as the Single Resolution Board deviated from the opinion of an independent expert on the need to draw up the definitive valuation report without substantiating its decision with any scientific or economic arguments. Fourth plea, alleging infringement of the right to an effective legal remedy and rights of defence and, consequently, infringement of Article 2 TFEU, Article 47 of the Charter and Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution. Fifth plea, alleging infringement of recital 24 of Regulation No 806/2014 and failure to comply with the ‘Meroni’ case-law, in so far as, first, the defendant has not been delegated the power to decide at its discretion whether or not it is appropriate to issue the definitive valuation report, and, secondly, and in any event, a decision such as the decision contested in the present action should have been overseen by the European Commission. ____________ 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).