15.5.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 173/13
Or, conversely, must those provisions be interpreted as meaning that the abovementioned claim or right constitutes an ‘accrued’ obligation or claim — Article 53(3) of the Directive — or ‘liability already accrued’ at the time of the resolution of the bank — Article 60(2)(b) — and, as such, excluded from the effects of the discharge or settlement of those obligations or claims, and, consequently, [that the abovementioned claim or right] is enforceable against Banco Santander, as the successor to Banco Popular, even where the claim from which that judgment ordering payment of compensation arises was brought after the procedure for the resolution of the bank had been concluded?
(1)
Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Council Directive 82/891/EEC, and Directives 2001/24/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2005/56/EC, 2007/36/EC, 2011/35/EU, 2012/30/EU and 2013/36/EU, and Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 648/2012, of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 190).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Bratislava III (Slovakia) lodged on 24 January 2023 — NFŠ a.s. v Slovenská republika (Slovak Republic), acting through the Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky, and Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky (Case C-28/23, NFŠ) (2023/C 173/19) Language of the case: Slovak Referring court Okresný súd Bratislava III
Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: NFŠ a.s.
Defendants: Slovenská republika (Slovak Republic), acting through the Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky, and Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky
Questions referred 1.
Do a grant agreement and an agreement to enter into a future sales agreement, concluded between a ministry (the State) and a person governed by private law selected outside competition procedures, constitute ‘public works contracts’ within the meaning of Article 1(2)(b) of Directive 2004/18 (1) or Article 2(6)(c) of Directive 2014/24 (2) where the grant agreement constitutes State aid approved by the European Commission for the purposes of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, the grant agreement contains an obligation on the State to grant a subsidy as well as an obligation on the person governed by private law to construct the building in accordance with conditions specified by the ministry and to allow a sports organisation to use a part of that building, and the agreement to enter into a future agreement contains a unilateral option conferred on the person governed by private law in the form of an obligation on the State to purchase the constructed building, while those agreements constitute a framework of mutual obligations between the ministry and the person governed by private law which are linked in terms of time and subject matter? 2.
Does Article 1(2)(b) of Directive 2004/18 or Article 2(6)(c) of Directive 2014/24 preclude national legislation of a Member State under which any legal act which by its content or purpose contravenes or circumvents the law or is contrary to accepted principles of morality is absolutely invalid (that is to say, from the outset/ex tunc) where that infringement of the law consists of a serious infringement of the rules on public procurement? 3.
Do Article 2d(1)(a) and Article 2d(2) of Directive 89/665 (3) preclude national legislation of a Member State under which any legal act which by its content or purpose contravenes or circumvents the law or is contrary to accepted principles of morality is absolutely invalid (that is to say, from the outset/ex tunc) where that infringement of the law consists of a serious infringement (circumvention) of the rules on public procurement, as in the main proceedings?