CELEX: 62013CA0140
Language: en
Date: 2014-11-12 00:00:00
Title: Case C-140/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Annett Altmann and Others v Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Directive 2004/39/EC — Article 54 — Obligation of professional secrecy incumbent on national financial supervisory authorities — Information concerning a fraudulent investment firm in compulsory liquidation)

19.1.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 16/3
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Annett Altmann and Others v Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht
      (Case C-140/13) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Directive 2004/39/EC - Article 54 - Obligation of professional secrecy incumbent on national financial supervisory authorities - Information concerning a fraudulent investment firm in compulsory liquidation)
      (2015/C 016/03)
      Language of the case: German
      
         Referring court
      
      Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicants: Annett Altmann, Torsten Altmann, Hans Abel, Waltraud Apitzsch, Uwe Apitzsch, Simone Arnold, Barbara Assheuer, Ingeborg Aubele, Karl-Heinz Aubele
      
         Defendant: Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht
      
         Intervening party:Frank Schmitt
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 54(1) and (2) of Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that, in administrative proceedings, a national supervisory authority may rely on the obligation to maintain professional secrecy against a person who, in a case not covered by criminal law and not in a civil or commercial proceeding, requests it to grant access to information concerning an investment firm which is in judicial liquidation, even where that firm’s main business model consisted in large scale fraud and wilful harming of investors’ interests and several executives of that firm have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment.
      
         (1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.