Case T-675/17: Action brought on 29 September 2017 — Aplicacions de Servei Monsan and Others v SRB
Date: 2017-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, bond, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017424EN.01004701.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/47





Action brought on 29 September 2017 — Aplicacions de Servei Monsan and Others v SRB
(Case T-675/17)
(2017/C 424/69)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: Aplicacions de Servei Monsan, SLU (Mollet del Vallés, Spain) and 79 other applicants (represented by: M. Romero Rey and I. Salama Salama, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


On the basis of Article 263 TFEU, annul Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 7 June 2017 adopting a resolution scheme in respect of the Banco Popular Español, S.A.;










—


In accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 340 TFEU and Article 41(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, order SRB to pay to the applicants compensation for the harm suffered, in the following amounts:






i.


Shareholders: the net financial value per Banco Popular share, which will be quantified precisely by means of further work on our expert report set out in Annex A.5, once we have been given the provisional and definitive valuations carried out by ‘independent experts’ as required under Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 806/2014 (findings of the expert report, Annex A.5.1, page 106);










ii.


Holders of Tier 1 capital instruments: the amount corresponding to the nominal value of the bonds, at the date of resolution, and corresponding default interest as of that date up to the date on which the corresponding reimbursement is made (expert report, Annex A.5.2, page 105);










iii.


Holders of Tier 2 capital instruments: the amount corresponding to the nominal value of the bonds, at the date of resolution, and corresponding default interest as of that date up to the date on which the corresponding reimbursement is made (expert report, Annex A.5.3, page 12);














—


In accordance with Articles 133 and 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.