62016TJ0698_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 30 November 2022 –Trasta Komercbanka and Others v ECB
(Case T‑698/16) (
1
)
(Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Specific supervisory tasks assigned to the ECB – Decision to withdraw a credit institution’s authorisation – Death of an applicant – No need to adjudicate in part – Powers of the national authorities of participating Member States and of the ECB under the Single Supervisory Mechanism – Equal treatment – Proportionality – Legitimate expectations – Legal certainty – Misuse of powers – Rights of the defence – Obligation to state reasons)
1.
Judicial proceedings – Action that has become devoid of purpose – Death of the applicant and proceedings not resumed by his or her successors – No need to adjudicate
(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 131(2))
(see paragraph 20)
2.
Action for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them – Direct concern – Decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to withdraw a credit institution’s authorisation – The shareholders of that credit institution not directly concerned – Inadmissibility
(Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU)
(see paragraphs 23, 24)
3.
Economic and monetary policy – Economic policy – Supervision of the EU financial sector – Single supervisory mechanism – Less significant institutions subject to direct prudential supervision by the national authorities – Establishing the facts constituting infringements of anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing legislation – Competences of national authorities – Withdrawal of authorisation from a credit institution on the ground of infringement of that legislation – Exclusive competence of the European Central Bank (ECB)
(Council Regulation No 1024/2013, Recitals 28 and 29 and Arts 4(1)(a) and 14(1) and (5); European Central Bank Regulation No 468/2014, Art. 83)
(see paragraphs 51-54, 65, 66, 162)
4.
Economic and monetary policy – Economic policy – Supervision of the EU financial sector – Single supervisory mechanism – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to withdraw a credit institution’s authorisation – Decision by the ECB based on its own assessment of the relevant circumstances of the case – Judicial review by the EU judicature – Right to effective judicial protection
(Council Regulation No 1024/2013, Arts 4(1)(a) and 14(5))
(see paragraphs 90, 167, 168, 190, 246, 247)
5.
Economic and monetary policy – Economic policy – Supervision of the EU financial sector – Single supervisory mechanism – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Observance of the rights of the defence – Right to be heard in the context of prudential supervisory procedures – Possibility of submitting comments on the draft decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to withdraw the authorisation of a credit institution
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Arts 41(2), 47 and 48; Council Regulation No 1024/2013, Arts 4(1), 14(5), and 22(2); European Central Bank Regulation No 468/2014, Arts 31, 32, 81(2) and 82(3))
(see paragraphs 91, 123-130, 135, 138, 139, 143, 144, 148, 169, 170, 266, 272, 273, 276, 277, 280-282, 296, 299, 313, 314)
6.
Economic and monetary policy – Economic policy – Supervision of the EU financial sector – Single supervisory mechanism – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to withdraw a credit institution’s authorisation – Decision repealed and replaced by a decision with identical content taken in the context of the review procedure – Retroactive effect from the time at which the reviewed decision took effect
(Council Regulation No 1024/2013, Art. 24(7) and (8); European Central Bank Decision 2014/360, Art. 9(1))
(see paragraphs 104-113)
7.
Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Assessment of the duty to state reasons by reference to the circumstances of the case
(Art. 296 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 155, 157, 325, 326, 330, 332)
8.
EU law – Principles – Proportionality – Scope – Discretion of the EU legislature – Judicial review – Limits
(Art. 5(4) TEU)
(see paragraphs 221, 222, 231)
9.
EU law – Principles – Equal treatment – Need to comply with the principle of legality – Impossible to rely on an unlawful act committed in favour of another
(see paragraphs 235, 236, 238, 248)
10.
EU law – Principles – Protection of legitimate expectations – Conditions – Specific assurances given by the authorities – Legal certainty – Requirement that acts producing legal effects be clear and precise
(see paragraphs 252, 253, 258-260)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action in so far as it was brought by Mr Igors Buimisters;
2.
Dismisses the action;
3.
Orders Trasta Komercbanka AS and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex, with the exception of Mr Buimisters, to pay the costs;
4.
Orders Mr Buimisters to bear his own costs;
5.
Orders the European Commission and the Republic of Latvia to bear their own costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 441, 28.11.2016.