EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/18

Action brought on 12 November 2012 — von Storch and Others v ECB

(Case T-492/12)

2013/C 32/29

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Sven A. von Storch (Berlin, Germany) and 5 216 others (represented by: M. Kerber and V. von Storch)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

— declare the decisions of the European Central Bank of 6 September 2012 on a number of technical features regarding the Eurosystem’s outright transactions in secondary sovereign bond markets incompatible with Articles 123 to 125 TFEU, declare the legal effect referred to in Article 264 TFEU and prevent further implementation;

— declare the decision of the European Central Bank of 6 September 2012 on additional measures to preserve collateral availability for counterparties in order to maintain their access to the Eurosystem’s liquidity-providing operators incompatible with Articles 123 to 125 TFEU, declare the legal effect referred to in Article 264 TFEU and prevent further implementation;

— in accordance with Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure, order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1. The decisions in dispute infringe Articles 123 to 125 TFEU. In that regard, the applicants claim that Article 123 TFEU prohibits monetising State debt and that on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 3603/93 (1) that prohibition applies generally, namely to the primary and secondary markets.

2. Furthermore, the ECB infringes Article 127 TFEU. The applicants claim that the ECB’s monetary mandate is aimed at price stability. By implementing the measures, the ECB is carrying out fiscal policy and is acting ultra vires.

3. Also the contested decisions are contrary to Protocol (No 27) on the internal market and competition (2) together with Article 51 TEU. According to the applicants, the acquisition of government securities from States in a state of financial emergency constitutes direct intervention in a market sector which is characterised by oversupply. That acquisition constitutes an artificial reduction in supply with corresponding effects on the current yield of those securities which are incompatible with the principles of undistorted competition.

4. The ECB is acting contrary to the combined provisions of Article 130 TFEU and Article 7 of the ESCB/ECB statute (3) as the President of the ECB succumbed to pressure to adopt the contested decisions.

5. The acquisition of government securities which is motivated by considerations of fiscal policy rather than monetary policy, and which does not seek to guarantee price stability, adversely affects the markets and accordingly threatens confidence in an independent monetary policy. In the applicants’ opinion, it follows from the rules of the European monetary union that they have a right to demand the discontinuance of manifestly destabilising conduct which is incompatible in particular with Article 123 and Article 125 TFEU.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 3603/93 of 13 December 1993 specifying definitions for the application of the prohibitions referred to in Articles 104 and 104b (1) of the Treaty (OJ 1993 L 332, p. 1).

(2) OJ 2010 C 83, p. 309.

(3) Protocol (No 4) on the statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank (OJ 2010 C 83, p. 230).